: A Book of Facts and Opinions 


we, 


Issued by 


THE COMMITTEE OF 
REFERENCE AND COUNSEL 


of the 
FOREIGN MISSIONS CONFERENCE 


OF NORTH AMERICA 
1926 





Oe 





| 


aie 
t 








phe 
Bere 


te 








Education for 
Peace 


A Book of Facts and Opinions 


Issued by 


THE COMMITTEE OF 
REFERENCE AND COUNSEL 


of the 


“FOREIGN MISSIONS CONFERENCE 
OF NORTH AMERICA 


25 MADISON AVENUE 
NEW YORK CITY 


1926 





FOREWORD 


Although this material is available for any who may be interested in 
the problem of world-peace, it is gathered with special reference to those 
who represent Christianity in non-Christian lands. There are some 
17,000 missionaries on the foreign field supported by the churches of 
North America. These missionaries occupy 90 different lands. Under 
their charge are schools enrolling more than 800,000 pupils. What are 
we doing with this vast trusteeship toward the creation of “peace on 
earth” and world brotherhood? 

The missionary, by the nature of his calling, is a promoter of peace. 
He preaches the love of God for all men; he seeks to build society on the 
brotherhood of mankind; the Bible is his textbook of good will; he deals 
with the problem of misunderstanding, hatred, and strife in a funda- 
mental way; he fears God and yet honors the King. 

Foreign missionaries have accomplished noteworthy things for peace— 

some of them are mentioned in these pages. The foreign missionary 
movement, however, has never been organized with this as one of its 
definite objectives. Many believe the time has come when this should 
be attempted. They feel that among the more than two score organiza- 
tions in America working for better international relations, the Foreign 
Missions Conference should be in the very forefront. Permanent world 
peace can be achieved only as the children of the world are trained to 
believe in it and to work co-operatively for it. The Church is calling 
on all those who shape the curricula of its educational institutions at 
home and abroad, and on those who exercise the teaching function, to 
inculcate reliance on law, justice, and reason and to develop a Christian 
internationalism, based on mutual respect, understanding, and co-opera- 
tion. How may we respond to this demand? 
_ The undersigned were asked, by the Committee of Reference and 
Counsel of the Foreign Missions Conference of North America, to make 
a study of the problem of Education for Peace as it relates to foreign 
missionary work, and to offer such inducements and helps as might prove 
desirable and feasible. In our opinion the primary need is for a series 
of textbooks, written from the scientific and pedagogical as well as from 
the religious point of view, by accredited authorities, and suited to the 
various grades of instruction. The production of such a series, however, 
involves several difficult problems, and we feel that it should wait upon 
the development of opinion and experience on the part of those actually 
engaged in foreign education. 

In the meantime we offer this pamphlet. It has three objectives: 
First, to acquaint the missionaries with the latest and best thought and 
investigation on the subject; second, to provide material which may be 
of service in the work of the class-room, the pulpit, and the conference 
hall; third, to draw from the missionaries all over the world a carefully 
considered opinion as to the feasibility of introducing courses on Chris- 
tian internationalism into the curricula of missionary schools, together 
with suggestions as to how the Boards can help the missionary in his 
capacity as a promoter of peace. 


ili 


? 


We invite correspondence, especially from those engaged in educational 
work. The best way, we suggest, will be for each missionary to corre- 
spond with his own Board secretary, and for the secretaries to send us 
a digest of such correspondence as may result. We shall be glad to be 
a clearing house for ideas and plans in the interest of a brotherly world 
through the message of the foreign missionary. 

In gathering this material, our aim has been not to attack the war 
system as such or to criticise governments, but rather to direct the dis- 
cussion against the causes of war, more especially those causes which 
arise from faulty education. We have thought best to take no position 
as between the extreme pacifists and those who think that under certain 
conditions a Christian may righteously engage in war. We present 
arguments on both sides of the great debate, and present also certain 
balancing considerations. Notwithstanding divergence of view at this 
point, there is abundant room for co-operative effort on the part of those 
who believe that Christianity is the ultimate solution of the problem 
of war. If you mean to undertake something in this line, we shall be 
glad to know of that fact and to keep in touch with any experiments 
you may undertake. Our next pamphlet may be a setting-forth of the 
actual methods being used in the mission schools of the world. 

We take this opportunity of expressing our sense of obligation to 
Miss Emma Agnes Licht, who has done much research work for us, and 
to Professor S. Ralph Harlow, of Smith College, who, as a former 
teacher in the International College of Smyrna, has been able to give us 
the missionary teacher’s point of view in the selection of material. 


CorneELius H. Patton, Chairman 
A. E. ARMSTRONG 

Witut1AM I. CHAMBERLAIN 
SaRAH S. Lyon 

EvELYN RitEy NICHOLSON 
FRANK K. SANDERS 

FENNELL P. TURNER 


E. 


II. 


Ill. 


LV: 


CONTENTS 


EDUCATION FOR WAR OR FOR PEACE Page 1 


Education the Great Need—Joseph Fort Newton 
Educating for Peace—World Conference on Education 
Educating for War—Evelyn Riley Nicholson 


*Teaching Hatred—Frederick J. Libby 


Creed of the Militarists in Fifteen Words 

Race Antagonism Unnatural—Basil Mathews 

Beginning in the Kindergarten—Evelyn Riley Nicholson 
War-like Sons of Missionaries—Chinese Recorder 
Fellowship of Youth for Peace 

The Church Can Do It—Will Irwin 


Causes OF WAR Page 4 


Tangible and Intangible Causes of War—H. H. Powers 
Causes Operative Today—Philip Kerr and Lionel Curtis 
Economic Causes—John Bakesless 

Barbarism the Principal Cause—Philip Kerr and Lionel Curtis 
Plotting a War—William Roscoe Thayer 

Comparative Study of Textbooks—Donald A. Taft 


Cost or WAR Page 8 


Tabulation of Cost—Kirby Page 

Visualizing the Cost—Jerome Davis and Roy B. Chamberlin 
Just a Little War—S. Ralph Harlow 

Moral Cost—Kirby Page 

The Harvest of Hate—Will Irwin 

Violence and Cunning—G. Sherwood Eddy 


FoLt_ty oF War Page 13 


Outcome of the World War—Kirby Page 

Futile and Suicidal—Kirby Page 

Future Wars—Kirby Page 

Thomas Hardy in an Interview with Frederick Lefevre— 
Thomas Hardy 

Forces of Destruction—John Galsworthy 

Shall We Commit Suicide ?—Winston S. Churchill 


Race DISTINCTIONS Page 17 


Race Superiority a Universal Claim—Robert E. Speer 
No Biological Difference—J. H. Oldham 

Verdict of Science—Benjamin Kidd 

Heredity and Civilization—Benjamin Kidd 
Caucasian Superiority—J. H. Oldham 

Nordic Superiority a Myth—Norman Leys 

Racial Capacity for Progress—J. H. Oldham 
African Inferiority Denied—Norman Leys 

All Races Inferior—Robert E. Speer 

Why Different Races ?—Basil Mathews 

Racial Differences—J. H. Oldham 

Appreciating Other Races—Daniel Johnson Fleming 
Contributions of the Races—Daniel Johnson Fleming 
Three Truths from India—Daniel Johnson Fleming 
The Common Stock of Civilization—Daniel Johnson Fleming 
Equality and Brotherhood—Basil Mathews 


Vv 


? 


Inter-racial Friendships—J. H. Oldham 
Forgetting Our Differences—J. H. Oldham 
All One in God—Daniel Johnson Fleming 


VI. NATIONALISM AND INTERNATIONALISM Page 26 


No East; No West—Baron Matsui 

World Unity—James Bryce 

Internationalism and Self-Interest—James Bryce 

Solidarity of the Human Race—Daniel Johnson Fleming 

Bound Up in One Bundle—Basil Mathews 

Interdependence of Nations—Daniel Johnson Fleming 

Intercourse Between Nations—C. Delisle Burns 

What Makes a Country Great?—C. Delisle Burns 

Ethnocentrism—Daniel Johnson Fleming 

Narrow Nationalism—Cornelius H. Patton 

Washington’s National Ideal—George Washington 

Extracts from Speeches by President Coolidge—President 
Coolidge 

Limitation of Rulers—James Bryce 

Christian Patriotism—Sidney L. Gulick 

The Larger Patriotism—C. O. P. E. C. 

National Pride—George Brandes 


VII. CrvmizaTION AND PEACE Page 34 


Civilization Built Upon Peace—C. Delisle Burns 
Merchants as Diplomatists—D. Delisle Burns 
Outgrowing War—Margaret Deland 

A Trust for Civilization 


VIII. Poxiricat SoLutions Page 37 


League of Nations—C. Delisle Burns 

The League’s Five Ways—Kirby Page 

The World Court—Kirby Page 

The Locarno Treaties 

Outlawry of War 

The League and the Golden Rule—C. O. P. E. C. 

A Highly Complex Problem—J. H. Oldham 

The Golden Rule and the State—Ernest DeWitt Burton 

The Alternative of International Goodwill—Cornelius H. 
Patton 

Nations Learning by Experience—Viscount Grey 

Changed Conditions-—Viscount Grey 

Learn or Perish—Viscount Grey 

The Supreme Need of Civilization—Viscount Grey 

Christ of the Andes—Frederick Lynch 


IX. Supremacy or Morar Forces Page 48 


The Final Forces—Edward M. Noyes 

The Sensible Idealist—James Bryce 

One Avenue to Peace—Frederick J. Libby 

What William Penn Demonstrated—D. Willard Lyon 


X. CHRISTIANIrY AND WorLp PEACE Page 50 


Christianity and Internationalism—William Pierson Merrill 
The Church and Internationalism—Charles E. Jefferson 
Christianity a World Religion—Baron Sakatani 
International Fellowship—C. O. P. E. C. 

Defect of Protestantism—Tyler Dennett 

Once a Christian Peace—C. Delisle Burns 


Vi 


Let the Church Lead—Evelyn Riley Nicholson 

Examples of International Fellowship—Daniel Johnson Fleming 
An Act of Faith—Kirby Page 

The Church and Peace—Historical Seas, pastes Eddy 
Is Pacifism the Only Remedy ?—C, O. P. 

Divergent Views 

Position of Those Who Do Not Accept Pacifism 

Pacifist Position 

A Middle Ground—“‘The Congregationalist” 

A Convinced Pacifist—S. Ralph Harlow 


XI. Foreign Missions AND WorLp PEACE Page.58 
Testimony of an Editor—Sidney L. Gulick 
Dr. W. A. P. Martin and International Law—W. A. P. Martin 
How a Missionary Secured the Return of the Boxer Indemnity 
—Arthur H. Smith 
Japanese-American Relations—Arthur Judson Brown 
In the South Seas—Alva W. Taylor 
Ending a War—Missionary Society, M. E. Church 
Greek Saves Turk—‘The World’s Youth” 
The Function of the Missionary—Evelyn Riley Nicholson 
Foreign Missions and World Peace—W. H. P. Faunce 
The Proper Christian Attitude Toward Recent Events in China 
If the Church Refuses 
International Ideals of the Churches of Christ 


XII. Srrikinc SENTENCES Page 66 
XIII. Porrry Page 68 


In Hearts Too Young—Ethel Blair Jordan 
Recessional—Kipling 

A New Earth—John Oxenham 

The Federation of the World—Tennyson 

In Christ No East Nor West—John Oxenham 
Brotherhood—Edwin Markham 

Illusions of War—Richard Le Gallienne 

Never Be Discouraged—Arthur Hugh Clough 
God End War !—Helen Gray Cone 

The Reformer—Edward Rowland Sill 


XIV. pe ONAL METHODS Page 72 


Educational Aims—National Council for Prevention of War 
Elementary School and High School—Wilford M. Aikin 
Lesson on World Friendship and World Peace—Mary Jenness 
Teaching Peace Through History—Janet Payne Whitney 
Teaching a Co-operative World—Janet Payne Whitney 
Athletics and World Friendship—Basil Mathews 

School-room Methods—National Council for Prevention of War 
Use of Stories—Gilbert Loveland 

First Habits for Internationalism—Harry A. Overstreet 
Peace Lessons for Schools 


XV. PRAYERS FOR PEACE Page 79 


Prayer for the Prevention of War—Walter Rauschenbusch 
Prayer for Freedom from Race Prejudice—Mornay Williams 
Praying for Peace—National Council for Prevention of War 
God of All Nations 

The Lord’s Prayer 


SOURCES OF QUOTATIONS Page 81 


Vii 








| ei ve an 


Tio We iegah 


| —* * ig (Ar 
Ty ‘ ; oe Tam. 
BA ¥ en CAA eh a eee 

; vy tid 
Abe! 4 iy Z ‘ 
7. 

ws 
, . 
“Ne 
‘ ee) . 





I—EDUCATION FOR WAR OR FOR PEACE 


EDUCATION THE GREAT NEED 


When at last the great guns were hushed, and the sob of grief had 
become a sigh following the evening sun around the world, an Oxford 
scholar asked all mankind a question. To England, France, Italy, Sweden, 
America, China, Japan he put the same question: “What is the leading 
interest of your country? What do your people really believe in?” The 
reply was startlingly unanimous, and expressed in one word, “Education.” 
When he varied the question and asked, “What have you learned from 
the war?” the answer was equally unanimous and emphatic: “We have 
learned our need of education.” 

No doubt many would prefer them to have replied, “We have learned 
our need of religion”; but after all it is much the same thing. Education 
is light, and God is light. The fact burned into the mind of the world is 
that the struggle for power, with its mean passions and its monstrous 
illusions, must give place to the struggle for light, with its wide fellow- 
ship and its consecrating enthusiasm. 

Joseph Fort Newton, Baccalaureate Address 
at University of Virgima, 1922. 


EDUCATING FOR PEACE 


The greatest task which lies ahead of the school in all lands is that of 
preparing the way for a new order of international justice, friendship and 
good will. Upon the instruction of the youth of the nations lies the respon- 
sibility of enlarging the national conceptions and promoting good will 
among the nations of the earth. Entirely new values and standards of 
judging need to be created. The emphasis must be placed upon the valor 
and patriotism of peace. If it is possible to set up a series of ideals such 
as a nation should become and to teach them to the rising generation, these 
ideals could eventually be realized. 

World Conference on Education, San Francisco, 1923 Report. 


EDUCATING FOR WAR 


“Tt is indisputable and of the very highest significance to civilization that 
an entire nation can be completely altered in character, in outlook and 
in motive, in a single generation,’ says Benjamin Kidd. Is that true? 
How can it be done? By education. “What you would put into the future 
you must hide in the heart of the child.” A generation ago Frances Wil- 
lard and Nietzsche were contemporaries. They entered the public schools 
of their respective countries to accomplish very different ends. Result: 
ne Prohibition Amendment in the United States; the World War in 

MEBDE. Cin) i, 

Is it not a travesty on true Christianity that we begin the cultivation of 
the bellicose spirit in our homes with the babies in the nursery, by giving 
them tin soldiers, toy Berthas, and battleships with which to wage mimic 
wars? . . . Since the days of the cave man war, the race’s greatest 
enemy, has persisted despite man’s evolution, and despite his conquest of 
other destructive agencies, because of false ideas, wrong premises, mental 
perversions, and obsessions. By tradition, precept, and example war is 
bred into him. He is taught that war is instinctive, inevitable, inseparable 
from the life of the race, inherent in ideals of sacrifice, loyalty, patriotism. 


1 


Each generation teaches its children’s children that “men always have 
fought, they always will;” that, as pagan Rome taught, “’Tis sweet to 
die for country,” and that the honored and glorious men and deeds of 
history have been those associated with war. Thus has war been bred 
into the race. It can be bred out. 

Evelyn Riley Nicholson. 


TEACHING HATRED 


All movements that succeed start in the schools. It is in the schools of 
the world that the peace movement will succeed or fail. If the old style 
militant nationalism continues to be taught there—the arrogance, the hate 
of past days—there is no hope. Hate is being taught now in the schools 
of every land and sometimes it is called patriotism. For myself, I learned 
to love France and to hate England as a schoolboy, through the lessons 
of the Revolutionary War. These lessons cou!d have been taught with- 
out breeding hate, I think; but they weren’t. South and North have not 
yet agreed on a history of the United States. Both are handing down 
from generation to generation the animosities of the Civil War by using 
different textbooks with utterly different viewpoints. They call this loy- 
alty. It is loyalty to the past but not to the future. The future demands 
that the glorification of war with its hatreds shall cease. 

Frederick J. Libby, “What Price Peace?” 


CREED OF THE MILITARISTS IN FIFTEEN WORDS 


War is inevitable because man is a fighting animal and you cannot 
change human nature. 


RACE ANTAGONISM UNNATURAL 


Race-antagonism we have discovered is not rooted in primitive instinct 
—it is not present in the natural child; it is put there through sugges- 
tion and education by the adult. It is not fundamental; it need not exist. 
This discovery breaks the terrible tyranny of race-antagonism over man. 
He can conquer and destroy race-war. We can “wipe out” our enemies 
by “‘wiping out” our enmities.” 

Basil Mathews, “The Clash of Color.” 


BEGINNING IN THE KINDERGARTEN 


Have we set ourselves to teach pagan ethics or have we simply never 
taken the trouble to adjust our whole educational system to a Christian 
code? Is not our ideal—so far as we have one—more nearly expressed 
by Horace Mann, “to enthrone the moral faculties over appetite and 
passion and to render all courses of instruction subservient to the great 
duties of love to God and love to man?” Or, by Woodrow Wilson in the 
words, “Ours is a Christian civilization and it must include sympathy and 
helpfulness and a willingness to forego self-interest in order to promote 
the welfare, happiness, and contentment of others?” 

Let us begin in our kindergarten to teach our children not how differ- 
ent they are from others, but how many experiences, needs and desires 
they share with babies of every other clime and color. When they lisp 
after us, “Our Father, who art in heaven,” let us explain just whose 
Father this is to whom we acknowledge allegiance. Is he a tribal God, 


fu 


or Father of a privileged class, caste or tint? When we teach geography 
and commerce, let us show what contribution each nation makes to the 
good of the whole: rice raised in China, used in the United States ; 
wheat grown on our plains, sustaining life in Russia; coffee raised in 
Brazil, tea in India, used in all lands. 

Evelyn Riley Nicholson, “The Way to a Warless World.” 


WAR-LIKE SONS OF MISSIONARIES 


A class of American High School boys, most of whom are mission- 
aries’ sons, names spontaneously as the great characters of history: 
Napoleon, Caesar, Alexander, Lincoln, Jesus, Moses, Hannibal, Pompey, 
Washington, Edison.” World history for them has evidently been writ- 
ten in terms of warfare. Will it always be so? What has been called 
the greatest educational effort by the churches in the United States in 
behalf of permanent peace is being directed among children in the Sunday 
Schools and young people’s societies. If we are to have a warless world 
it will be as the result of education. Christian international ideals must 
be taught, not sprung. So the World Alliance for Friendship and the 
Federal Council of Churches are undertaking to teach the children that 
the settlement of disputes between nations can be brought about by con- 
ST, agreements, and courts of justice if the people of these nations 
will it. 

Chinese Recorder, January, 1925. 


FELLOWSHIP OF YOUTH FOR PEACE 
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE. 


To our generation comes the challenge to abolish war. In rising to 
meet this challenge young men and women the world over are finding 
common ground. We realize that to outlaw war there must be world 
federation of youth. The Fellowship of Youth for Peace is a part of 
the world-wide movement of the Youth of all classes, nations, and races 
who recognize the unity of the human family and wish to live in this 
spirit of friendship. It will be our aim to let no interest of self, family, 
creed, class, nation or race separate us from our fellow men. We are 
determined to abolish the treason to humanity involved in war. The 
American Movement is a dynamic factor in this world federation. We 
Youth must courageously face the problems of race prejudice, economic 
conditions, education, our moral responsibilities and all human relation- 
ships and approach their study in a new spirit. Standing together the ris- 
ing generation can build a new world by which suspicion, hatred, and war 
will be replaced by mutual trust, goodwill, and fellowship. 


Prior, CAN DO LT 


If all the Christian sects, combining with one another and with Judaism 
on this single issue, should start the work of educating their sons and 
daughters in the illusion and immorality of war, we should within a year 
mark the changing mood of man. Within twenty years, when the gen- 
eration, at present learning its texts and catechism in Sunday school, 
reached the age of fruition, the job of bringing peace to our world would 
be done. The Church can do it, even if she confines herself to her oldest 
policy—just personal work with the individual. 

Will Irwin, “Christ or Mars?” 


3 


II—CAUSES OF WAR 


TANGIBLE AND INTANGIBLE CAUSES OF WAR 


The most comprehensive and authentic discussion of the causes of war 
is found in the book, The Things Men Fight For by Dr. H. H. Powers, 
University Prints, Boston. Written from the non-idealistic standpoint, 
and seeking to deal with the facts of the actual world and with human 
nature as it is, Dr. Powers does not exclude the working of moral forces. 
The book should be read by all who wish to keep their feet on the ground. 
In discussing the tangible causes the book deals with such things as: 
defense of the soil of a nation, the seizure of territory adjacent to the 
boundary, the defense of independence, and commercial advantage. Un- 
der the intangible causes are the following: the ideal of race unity, integ- 
rity of language, religion, the ideal of nationality, growth of population. 
The body of the book is taken up with a consideration of these causes 
as applied to the leading geographical areas of the world. 


CAUSES OPERATIVE TODAY 


The causes of war are legion. There have been wars of conquest, of 
religion, of race, of nationality, of liberation, in the past. There are 
wars of race and nationality and color, and of trade and commerce, loom- 
ing up in the future. Can anybody who surveys the world today, with 
Africa just stirring into life, with Asia once more on the move, with 
Russia Bolshevized, and with Mohammedans beginning to unite, with the 
all-pervading question of the color line, with half of the nations of Europe 
profoundly aggrieved by the results of the war—can anyone believe that 
we can afford to fold our hands, and enjoy our little pleasures and vain 
amusements and dreamily hope that all will be for the best? Can these 
terrific forces be adjusted or dispelled without the collision of war, by 
sitting still and doing nothing? Will not the old enemy inevitably engulf 
us again, if we do nothing to chain him up? 

Philip Kerr and Lionel Curtis, “The Prevention of War.” 


ECONOMIC CAUSES 


Colonial rivalries in Asia, Africa, and the islands scattered here and 
there about the globe; friction over spheres of economic influence; diffi- 
culties over coaling stations and the safeguarding of trade routes, dis- 
placing by one nation of another in a favorite and long-accustomed field— 
all these have contributed to the era of fear, hate and distrust that broke 
into war at last. Out of commercial rivalries and rival merchant fleets 
have grown up hostile navies. Out of ill-adjusted economic frontiers and 
the resultant suffering have grown great military establishments. In the 
end war had to come. The surprising thing is not that the World War 
came at last, but that it did not come long before. 

John Bakesless, “The Economic Causes of Modern Wars.” 


BARBARISM THE PRINCIPAL CAUSE 


Is war really necessary to human progress? Must we continue to sub- 
mit to a regular recurrence of these appalling evils every few decades 
as the price of winning more freedom for humanity? Is war, so to 
speak, a law of nature? Or is it, like duelling, or ordeal by fire, or 


4 


stage coaches, or sailing vessels, an expedient, natural, perhaps, in a 
primitive age, but one which can be superseded by something better as 
common sense and clear thinking and good will are brought to bear upon 
the problem? 

I would answer unhesitatingly that war is barbarism, that it is not 
inevitable, and that if it takes place between civilized powers, it is be- 
cause they have failed to create an alternative system whereby their dis- 
putes, or the great issues involved in human progress, can be settled by 
other and more sensible means. 

Philip Kerr and Lionel Curtis, “The Prevention of War.” 


PLOTTING A WAR 


Professor William Roscoe Thayer, in his The Life and Times of 
Cavour, describes how Cavour, as Premier of Piedmont, and Napoleon 
III, in 1859, deliberately plotted to bring about a war between France 
and Piedmont on the one side and Austria on the other. These two arch- 
conspirators met in an obscure hamlet in Switzerland and planned to 
goad Austria into some act of aggression. Asked when he thought he 
could bring about the desired result, Cavour replied that he should force 
Austria to declare war about the first week in May. He did better than 
that by more than a week. When Austria, falling into the trap, sent the 
desired reply, Cavour said to his friends waiting anxiously in his ante- 
chamber: “Alea jacta est! The die is cast! We have made history— 
now let us go and dine.” 

Professor Thayer contrasts the enthusiasm of France at the outbreak 
of the war with the feelings of Napoleon when he faced the awful 
carnage of Solferino. “In France, especially at Paris, public opinion had 
suddenly whirled around. ‘We are a droll nation!’ Merimee confided to 
Panizzi on April 29. ‘A fortnight ago I wrote you that there was only 
one man in France who desired war, and I believe I told the truth. Today, 
consider the opposite as true. The Gallic instinct is aroused. Now there 
is an enthusiasm which has its magnificent side, and also its dreadful 
side. The people accepts the war with joy: it is full of confidence and 
of spirit. As for the soldiers, they depart as to a ball. Day before 
yesterday they chalked on their wagons: “Pleasure trains for Italy and 
Vienna.” When they pass through the streets on their way to the rail- 
way stations, the populace cover them with flowers, bring them wine, 
embrace them. adjure them to kill as many Austrians as they can. The 
regiment of Zouaves of the Guard had its orders to start a week ago. 
They shouted, “This is war; no more police hall for us!” and the regi- 
ment disappeared for two days. They had to say goodby to all the 
cooks of their acquaintance. At the moment of departure, not a man was 
missing: every one of them had a sprig of lilacs in the muzzle of his gun. 
In this French gaiety there is a considerable element of success. Our 
fellows are convinced they are going to win, and in war that counts for 
much. They regard themselves as knights errant going to fight for their 
lady. I hold the Austrians for very brave soldiers; but every one of 
ours imagines he is going to become at least a colonel, and a Croat has 
no such ideas.’ 

After Solferino. “As he (Napoleon) visited several parts of the battle- 
field he was horror-stricken. Nearly five thousand dead were awaiting 
such hasty burial as the soldiers of the day before, and sextons now, 
could give them. Most agonizing were the shrieks ang groans of the 
wounded, of whom ten or twelve thousand had not yet been removed, 
for to transport such a host called for more vehicles than could be pro- 
cured. The number of surgeons fell so far short that days elapsed before 
all the sufferers could be attended to. Medicine and bandages gave out. 


5 


And all the while the broiling sun sapped the vigor of the strong and 
intensified the tortures of the stricken. By degrees the army of wounded 
was conveyed to Brescia, and thence to Milan, where they joined their 
brothers from Magenta and Melegnano. But the non-combatants, to 
whom the sixty square miles of battlefield had been home, the farmers 
and peasants, the dwellers in the hamlets, the artisans and small trades- 
men and landed proprietors in the villages, who had escaped with their 
lives from the carnage, found deserted fields, trampled crops, roads and 
water-ways torn up, buildings demolished, cattle and food gone, their 
hopes blighted, and themselves plunged in a single day from peaceful 
thrift into calamity: and that not by earthquake, not by flood, not by 
volcano, but by the remorseless passions of their brother men.” 

A few days later Emperor Napoleon gave to General Fleury a letter 
to deliver at once to Emperor Francis Joseph who was at Verona, pro- 
posing an interview with reference to declaring an armistice. 


COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TEXTBOOKS 


Surely this audience does not need to be reminded that there is no one 
cause of war. I notice by the morning paper that you have already listed 
twenty-four of them, and I think that the final number will be more in- 
clined to grow than shrink. You have been listening for five days to 
specialists, each presumably stressing a different cause or a different cure. 
But you are also endeavoring to correlate these factors into a unified 
whole and to see their relationship to one another. I am here to empha- 
size another factor—the teaching of history, as seen in the textbooks of 
different countries. But I do not come as a specialist in this field. I 
am neither an historian nor a specialist in the field of education. I am 
simply a student of sociology trying to analyze our most complex social 
problem—war—into its different factors or causes. In doing this I have 
found the influence of the teaching of history in creating hostile or 
friendly attitudes toward other peoples an important and a somewhat 
neglected factor. . . . There is no one cure for war. It is con- 
ceivable that some one important change, such as the adoption of an 
ideal protocol or the organization of a real League of Nations, may go 
very far toward reducing the likelihood of conflict; but the success of 
the protocol and the permanence of such a league must, I submit, largely 
depend upon the support they receive from other sources. Backed up 
by public opinion, supported by educational policies, relieved from the dis- 
integrating effect of the world’s scramble for oil, and secure from the 
irresistible pressure of a redundant population, say, in Japan, such a 
protocol and such a league have just a chance for success. By them- 
selves, they are probably doomed to failure. The attack on war must 
be simultaneous along all lines. One of these lines is the educational. 
Therefore I ask your consideration of the question, Is the teaching of 
history, as set forth in textbooks of certain countries, making for war 
or for peace? . . . The most important investigation of the type 
which interests us today is that of the Paris branch of the Carnegie En- 
dowment for International Peace, published in 1923. This study examined 
the post-war textbooks of England, France, Germany, Austria, Italy, and 
Bulgaria and was written under the editorial direction of Frenchmen. It, 
nevertheless, makes an attempt at impartial treatment. It is unfortunate, 
however, that the analysis of German textbooks was made by two ardent 
French professors. The general conclusions are similar to my own. But, 
whether true or not, some of the assumptions of this study would not be 
accepted without much qualification by German scholars. . . As to the 
cause of the war, French children read: “The war was caused solely by Ger- 
man aggression. |The Germans believing themselves a superior race, have 


6 


long plotted to exterminate the ‘unworthy’ French.” German children read: 
“Germany is guiltless; English jealousy and French desire for revenge 
were the chief among many causes.” We are dealing here, of course, 
with the fundamental of fundamentals. French and German children 
are naturally taught opposite notions as to responsibility for the war. 
Occasionally, in the German books, there is some approach to a recogni- 
tion of joint responsibility for a war which grew out of the complex 
situation preceding it. I have found no such suggestion in any of the 
French books, and the general emphasis of the German books is an indi- 
cated on the chart. As to colonial policy, French children read: “The 
French colonial policy has always been peaceful, but German ill-will has 
always tried to thwart it.” While German children read: “The French 
colonial policy was not really pacific, and England thwarted German 
attempts at fair play.” As to the policy of the “armed peace,” French 
children read: “Germany’s assertion that she was encircled by enemies 
was a mere pretense. The danger from the wicked Germans alone made 
European armaments necessary.” German children read: “Germany was 

encircled by her enemies and her armaments were purely defensive.” 
As to the German Republic, French children read: “The German 
Republic is a mere sham, and another war is already being planned in 
Germany.” The German textbooks vary considerably in their treatment 
of the Republic, some giving it scarce attention and implying that the 
Social-Democrats wére traitors to the Empire. Other texts, however, 
give great space to the Republic and the Constitution of Weimar, holding 
them up as the hope for the regeneration of Germany. In other words, 
German textbook writers reflect different points of view with reference 
to democracy, just as American textbook writers reflect different points 
of view with reference to the League of Nations. . . . As to the 
future, French children read: “Germans are beasts, and the German 
menace will never cease. Therefore, France, beware.” German children 
read: “German youth, this treaty must not be permanent.” Can there 
be any question that the coming generation of French and German chil- 
dren, each as innocent as our own children of responsibility for the World 
War, are growing up with diametrically opposite attitudes towards it? 
Unless some other radically different influence enters their lives, they can 

not choose but hate each other. 

Professor Donald A. Taft, History Department, Wells College, Con- 
ference on Cause and Cure of War, Washington, 1925. 


NI 


III—COST OF WAR 


TABULATION LOR. COS. 


Losses in Life: 
is shown in the following table: 


CASUALTIES OF THE GREAT WorRLD WAR 


The appalling cost of the World War in human life 


Known Seriously Otherwise Prisoners 

Country Dead Wounded Wounded or Missing 
United States ..:... 107,284} 43,000 148,000 4,912 
Greate OFitainv- cn 807,451f 617,740 1,441,394 64,907 
France. wesc ee eo tae 1,427,800¢ 700,000 2,344,000 453,500 
Rissiamr een or ee 2,762,064 1,000,000 3,950,000 = 2,500,000 
ltalys See eeacen 507,160 500,000 462,196 1,359,000 
Belsini® 32 yc 267,000 40,000 100,000 10,000 
DELDIA giana Oa 707,343 322,000 28,000 100,000 
Roumatias: ose: 339,117 200,000 =* 116,000 
(Greece tac se rae ee 15,000 10,000 30,000 45,000 
Porineal een 4,000 5,000 12,000 200 
JADAN bees cece 300 tbe 907 3 
CP Ofalmae ee oe 6,938,519 3,437,740 8,516,497 4,653,522 
CSermiany tc. e wae n 1,611,104 1,600,000 2,183,143 772,522 
Austria-Hungary 911,000 850,000 2,150,000 443,000 
IL KEY ati cet ate: 436,924 107,772 300,000 103,731 
Bulgartdes sees oe 101,224§ 300,000 852,399 10,825 
Sota bi lets. 3,060,252 ZiO0A Le 5,485,542 1,330,078 
Grand Total 9,998,771 6,295,512 14,002,039 5,983,600 

*Unofficial. 


*Includes deaths at home and in Expeditionary Force. 
tIncludes colonial casualties. 

§Exclusive of influenza deaths and those killed in Macedonia. 
**Included in preceding column. 


It is not possible for the human mind to comprehend the significance 
of ten million men and boys killed in the war. All of us have stood in 
line for hours as we watched some huge procession. No one of us, how- 
ever, has ever seen a procession of a million men. A parade of ten mill- 
ion soldiers, marching from daylight to dark, ten abreast, with each line 
only two seconds behind another, would require 46 days to pass a given 
point. 

As ghastly as these figures appear, they do not tell the whole story. 
Of the 5,983,600 men listed as “prisoners or missing,” a considerable per- 
centage were undoubtedly killed in action. It was officially estimated in 
England that 60 per cent of the missing were probably dead. The esti- 
mate in Canada was 56 per cent and in France 40 per cent. If, therefore, 
half those listed as “prisoners or missing” be presumed to be dead the 
total death toll is increased by 2,991,800. 


8 


The above figures include only the casualties among the men under 
arms. There was in addition a very heavy loss of life among civilians 
as a direct result of the war, including deaths from war diseases and 
pestilences, massacres, bombardments, air raids, submarine attacks, 
deportations, exposure, malnutrition, starvation, etc. After carefully 
examining a great mass of evidence, Professor Bogart says: “In conclu- 
sion it may fairly be estimated that the loss of civilian life due directly to 
war, or to causes induced by war, equals, if indeed it does not exceed, 
that suffered by the armies in the field. In view of the facts cited, such 
an estimate must be regarded as conservative.” This would add 13,000,- 
000 to the total death toll of the war. 

The number of children left fatherless by the war is appalling. In 
France it was officially estimated that 887,500 French children lost their 
fathers in the war. Dr. Folks has estimated that 512,000 Italian chil- 
dren were left fatherless. If the ratio of French war orphans to French 
dead holds true of the other nations, 6,500,000 children were left father- 
less by the war. If the Italian ratio is used this number will he nearly 
doubled. Since the French birth rate is among the lowest and the Italian 
is among the highest, the actual number of war orphans is probably in 
the neighborhood of 9,000,000. 

In France the Pension Office had formal knowledge of 585,000 war 
widows on Armistice day. The total number was undoubted!y much 
larger than this. The French marriage rate is lower than in most coun- 
tries. It is, therefore, probably conservative to estimate that from 40 to 
45 per cent of the total number of men killed were survived by widows. 
Als means that approximately 5,000,000 women were left widows by 
the war. 

Human misery and actual loss of life were enormously increased by 
reason of the fact that millions of people were forced by invasion to flee 
from home. In this connection Dr. Folks says: “‘We have seen them 
_walking footsore, burden-bearing, falling by the wayside. We know of 
babies born on the way, and of mothers carrying new-born babies for 
miles. We have seen refugees packed by main force into stifling freight- 
cars and slowly hauled with many long interruptions, somewhere into 
the interior, hungry, filthy, weary, depressed. This happened to 1,250,000 
people in Belgium, to 2,000,000 in France, to 500,000 in Italy, to 300,000 
in Greece, to, say, 300,000 in Serbia, to 2,000,000 Armenians (except that 
they walked out into the desert and most of them to death), to 400,000 
in East Prussia, to huge but unknown numbers in Roumania, Russia and 
Austria—all told, to some 10,000,000 people.” 

One of the most serious costs of the war is found in its biological 
aspects. The 13,000,000 dead soldiers included an extraordinarily high 
percentage of the best manhood of the nations. The weaklings and 
degenerates were rejected. The strongest, the keenest and the most 
upright, lost their lives in appalling numbers. It is too soon to measure 
the cost of this sacrifice of the best young life of the world. 

Let us now gather together in a comprehensive summary the out- 
standing human costs of the war: 


10,000,000 Known dead soldiers. 
3,000,000 Presumed dead soldiers. 
13,000,000 Dead civilians. 
20,000,000 Wounded. 

3,000,000 Prisoners. 

9,000,000 War orphans. 

5,000,000 War widows. 

10,000,000 Refugees. 


This summary may be read in less than sixty seconds, but no human 
mind is capable of grasping its meaning and significance. Each one of 


9 


us knows something of the tragedy of death in the home, a few of us 
are frequently called to console bereaved families, but no one of us has 


sufficient imagination to think in terms of millions of dead men. 
Kirby Page, “War.” 


VISUALIZING THE COST 


Human Cost: The World Tomorrow, for January, 1924, carries the 
following: “Let us visualize a march of the British dead down Fifth 
Avenue. At day break they start, twenty abreast. Until sundown they 
march—and the next day, and the next. For ten days the British dead 
pass in review. For eleven days more the French dead file down the 
‘Avenue of the Allies.’ For the Russians it would require the daylight 
of five more weeks. Two months and a half would be required for 
the Allied dead to pass a given point. The enemy dead would require 
more than six weeks more. . 

Let the class list some of the possible ‘ ‘great men” included in that 
terrible march, great men lost to the world. 

MaterrAt Cost: Dr. H. E. Fosdick, preacher in New York City, said 
in his Armistice Day sermon, 1923: 

“Tn this last war we spent on the average $215,000,000 a day or $9,000,- 
000 an hour. . . . Consider all the money all the churches of America 
raised last year for all their Christian work at home or abroad! Every 
three days during the war we burned up more than that. Such is modern 
war, and it is utterly suicidal.” 

Let the class list some things that might be done with $9,000,000, not 
per hour, but per month or per year. 

Jerome Davis and Roy B. Chamberlin, 
“Christian Fellowship Among the Nations.” 


JUST A LITTLE WAR 


In Turkey I found myself in contact with Mohammedanism. One of 
the chief inspirations of my work, as I sought in life and word to 
interpret the Christian gospel in that land, was the fact that Jesus came 
with a message of love and peace, and refused to compromise, by resort- 
ing to the sword, as was done later by the Prophet of Islam. Suddenly 
we found ourselves plunged in war. That first Balkin struggle which 
broke out in the Fall of 1912, and continued with savage ferocity through 
the winter, opened my eyes to another aspect of war. Thousands of 
troops marched by my door, and soon we were engaged in Red Cross 
work. I saw that war meant thousands of homeless women and children, 
countless refugees, typhus, horrible wounds, callousness to suffering, and, 
above all, the stirring of racial and national hatreds into white flame. The 
Mosques of Smyrna were packed with hundreds of homeless little chil- 
dren, tiny new born babes, starved and sad-eyed women, whose homes 
had been destroyed and who bore the tragic marks of what war does 
to women and children, written in their faces. I came to feel an over- 
powering sense of the need of Jesus and His Way of Life, as, day by 
day, I helped feed these refugees of war. 

S. Ralph Harlow, “The Greatest Issue of Our Generation.” 


MORAL COST 


The war has created an appalling amount of hatred. For nearly ten 
years the creation of hatred has been one of the main tasks of govern- 


10 


ments. Hate has its uses in peace as well as in war, and governments 
have not been slow to arouse it when their objectives could be furthered 
in that way. 

The greatest tragedy of all is that efforts along this line have not 
been confined to adults. Hatred has been systematically cultivated among 
children as well. . . . It is almost maddening to think intently upon 
the things to which millions of children and young people have been 
subjected during the past decade: bloodshed, violence, terror, exposure, 
exile, hunger, disease, homelessness, bereavement, hatred! And all these 
during the most plastic age, when impressions are most lasting. In 
what way could an archfiend more certainly insure violence, bloodshed 
and universal catastrophe in the years ahead? 

Kirby Page, “War.” 


RHE HARVEST* OF HATE 


The world over, we found that the hate-propaganda, the conscious 
effort to make the soldier “a bit of a brute” had long effects. Every- 
where were “crime waves’—highway robbery, burglary, sudden murders 
of passion. Ours was perhaps the lightest of all. The police records 
of Berlin in 1919 read like annals of the old days of Jack Sheppard. 
The Belgian police were forced, for the first time since Barons ruled in 
Flanders, to fight organized gangs of bandits. England boasted in old 
years a low murder rate; and her courts had a swift and certain way of 
hanging for murder without regard to wealth or social rank. “The un- 
written law” did not exist for British juries. Just after the war, England 
experienced a series of “murders of passion,” by ex-soldiers and ex- 
offcers; and British juries acquitted the murderers as lightly as once 
did Latin judges. How much of this mentality back of these crime- 
waves sprang from actual experience at the Front and how much from 
the education in brutality of the new military training, no one of course 
can say. Doubtless both influences bore on this crime wave. 

Will Irwin, “The Next War.” 


VIOLENCE AND CUNNING 


Dr. Fosdick says, “One of our young men came back from France, 
and, like many others, would not talk. One day his father took him 
apart and rebuked him for his silence. ‘Just one thing I will tell you,’ 
he answered. ‘One night I was on patrol in No Man’s Land and sud- 
denly I came face to face with a German boy about my own age. It 
was a question of his life or mine. We fought like wild beasts. When 
I came back that night, I was covered from head to foot with the blood 
and brains of that young German boy. We had nothing personally against 
each other. He did not want to kill me any more than I wanted to kill 
him. That is war. I did my duty in it, but for God’s sake do not ask 
Me tostalkeabout it. -l wantito forget it! 2) st. 

The means of conducting war, according to the war books, are 
“violence and cunning.” It is the making of immorality lawful that is 
so disastrously demoralizing. Professor Forsyth urges us to “fall back 
on an inferior ethic and make the best of it.” Another Christian leader 
says: “I admit that war is unchristian, but when war comes, I put my 
Christianity in my pocket and go out and fight.” But is Christianity, 
or the moral order, a convenience to be pocketed? And what is this 
boundless evil that prostitutes and violates the highest and holiest things 
in life? What effect has this not only upon standards of conduct for 
the nation, but of the Church itself? War is bound to destroy the 


11 


moral standards if it is founded on “the one act which is the supreme 
violation of morals—killings,” and if it brings all other immoralities 
in its train. Will Irwin says of the men who went through it all: 
“Bayonet practice was a most effective piece of ‘psychological prepara- 
tion.’ The sergeants in charge of this game enacted a kind of hymn of 
hate, a familiar combination of American oaths shouted to the swing of 
a rifle. It went like this: ‘God’ (presents point) ‘damn’ (swing back) 
‘you’ (thrust). How many died with the sergeant’s hymn of hate on 
their lips?” 

I fully recognize that neither the position that war is the greater of 
two evils, nor its opposite, is capable of absolute logical demonstration. 
But nothing in my judgment could work worse than war. For it carries 
with it all other evils in its train—hatred, vengeance, murder, atrocity, 
falsehood, deceit, sexual passion; the defense of evil, the searing of 
conscience, the loss of moral standards : disease, famine, poverty, despair ; 
violence, revolution, lawlessness, crime and death. What evil is wanting 
that war does not multiply and intensify? What good does it ac- 
complish that could not be better won by peace? 

Sherwood Eddy, “The Abolition of War.” 


IV—FOLLY OF WAR 


OUTCOME OF THE WORLD WAR 


Did the war make the world safe for democracy? Indeed did the war 
make the world safe for any of the higher values of life? Here also the 
answer is complete and convincing. ‘Recent events,” says Lord Grey, 
former British Minister of Foreign Affairs, “have shown us with horrid 
clearness Europe sliding surely, though it may appear slowly, toward 
the abyss. Do we realize how far down the slope we have already gone? 
How does liberty stand in Europe today?—that liberty our generation 
was brought up to believe could be secured only by popular representative 
government? Russia is as far from it as ever she was—not even an 
elected Duma. Now Italy has practically a dictatorship. So has Spain. 
Germany is either under a dictatorship or in chaos.” It has been a long, 
long time since the world was as unsafe for human life, democracy, truth 
or virtue as at this very hour. 

Is it not supreme folly to say that a great war is the lesser of two 
evils? It is a combination of all the major evils of contemporary life. 
There is no sin of man that is not intensified by war. Dr. Homer Folks 
has well said: “We may select from all these other enemies of human 
life their worst features, combine them into one quintessence of horror, 
intensify this to-the nth degree, scatter it continent-wide, and that is war. 

Kirby Page, “War.” 


FUTILE AND SUICIDAL 


But this I do see clearly: that war is the most colossal and ruinous 
social sin that afflicts mankind today; that it is utterly and irremediably 
unchristian; that however armed conflict in times past may have served 
an evolutionary purpose it has now become not only futile, but suicidal, 
and that recognition of this fact is necessary to the continuance of 
civilization; that the war system means everything which Jesus did not 
mean and means nothing that he did mean; and that it is a more blatant 
denial of every Christian doctrine about God and man than all the 
theoretical atheists on earth ever could devise. . . . I must say that 
the more I consider war, its sources, methods, and results, its debasing 
welter of lies and brutality, its unspeakable horror while it is here and 
its utter futility in the end to achieve any good thing that mankind could 
wish, the more difficult I find it to imagine any situation in which I 
shall feel justified in sanctioning or participating in another war. 

Harry Emerson Fosdick, in Introduction, “War”, by Kirby Page. 


FUTURE WARS 


Colonel Fuller has painted a picture of a possible scene in the future: 
“T believe that, in future warfare, great cities, such as London, will be 
attacked from the air, and that a fleet of 500 aeroplanes, each carrying 
500 ten-pound bombs of, let us suppose, mustard gas, might cause 200,000 
minor casualties and throw the whole city into a panic within half an 
hour of their arrival. Picture, if you can, what the result will be: 
London for several days will be one vast raving Bedlam, the hospitals 
will be stormed, traffic will cease, the homeless will shriek for help, 
the city will be in pandemonium. 

Kirby Page, “War.” 


13 


THOMAS HARDY IN AN INTERVIEW WITH 
FREDERICK LEFEVRE 


I never can think without astonishment that there are some people 
in different countries who dare to talk about the benefits of war. What 
nonsense, what stupidity! War is an evil thing and can only breed 
evil. No one is justified in trying to make out that war has had a 
beneficial effect upon things aesthetic. ] frankly do not understand that. 
Since war has diminished our human capital—and to what a degree !— 
it has therefore diminished our intellectual capital. Many young writers 
were killed, and I frankly do not see how their intellectual wealth can 
have found its way to those who survived. 

You ask about lessons of the war? Yes, but they cannot be utilized. 
There are no lessons of war. War is a fatality. It has nothing to do 
with either reason or intelligence. War is something irresistible. It 
seems to obey some kind of devilish determinism, and when peoples go 
to war they do not make that ridiculous decision in order to follow the 
counsels of reason or to obey their intelligence. No development or 
perfection in either one or the other could stop wars, since neither reason 
nor intelligence has anything to do with supporting them. Perhaps to- 
morrow things will be otherwise, but I have no great confidence. I 
think rather that we are entering on a dark age whose port cf entry 
was the abominable war we have just lived through. 

The Great War seems to me to weigh upon the world like a curse, 
and it has not yet borne its bitterest fruit. Does it not terrify you to 
think that, at the very hour when your poor land of France is smoking 
with the blood of millions of dead whom the peoples of the world left 
there, there are still those who in the newspapers of the whole world 
even now are talking about the next war—“the next,” as they call it, in 
a kind of ghastly abbreviation? Is this not a cause for frank despair? 
What causes me perhaps a still greater surprise is that those who read 
these journals find all this quite natural. They do not throw such news- 
papers down in disgust. You should have seen the papers yesterday. 
They were filled with the discovery of some German chemist whose 
genius sufficed to invent a kind of powder, a very small amount of which 
can destroy entire cities. I do not say that this was admired, but at 
least people lingered with guilty willingness over this discovery. I tell 
you, if there were any sense in those who govern us, that man would 
have been hanged high and quickly. There would have been less pity 
for him than for a counterfeiter. 

I do not see that anything can save the world from all the bloody 
follies in which for ten years it has sunk itself. Religion alone has 
any chance of success in bringing about this union of the people. By 
religion I mean the religious spirit, but at this moment religion is 
suffering such shocks, such transformations, that its capacity for action 
is curiously diminished. 

Living Age, April 11, 1925. 


FORCES OF DESTRUCTION 


Without any doubt whatever, the powers of destruction are gaining 
fast on the powers of creation and construction. In old days a Thirty 
Years’ War was needed to exhaust a nation; it will soon be (if it is 
not already) possible to exhaust a nation in a week by the destruction 
of its big towns from the air. The conquest of the air, so jubilantly 
hailed by the unthinking, was the most sinister event that ever befell us, 
simply because it came before we were fit for it—fit to act reasonably 
under the temptation of its fearful possibilities. The use made of it in 


14 


the last war showed that; and the sheep-like refusal of the startled nations 
to face the new situation, and unanimously ban chemical warfare and 
flying for destructive purposes, shows it still more clearly. No one 
denies that the conquest of the air was a great—a wonderful—achieve- 
ment; no one denies that it could be a beneficent achievement if the 
nations would let it be. But mankind has not yet apparently reached a 
pitch of decency sufficient to be trusted with such an inviting and terribly 
destructive weapon. 

John Galsworthy, “International Thought.” 


SHALL WE COMMIT SUICIDE? 


The story of the human race is War. Except for brief and precarious 
interludes, there has never been peace in the world; and before history 
began murderous strife was universal and unending. But up to the 
present time the means of destruction at the disposal of man have not 
kept pace with his ferocity. Reciprocal extermination was impossible 
in the Stone Age. One cannot do much with a clumsy club. Besides, 
men were so scarce and hid so well that they were hard to find. They 
fled so fast that they were hard to catch. Human legs could only cover 
a cerain distance each day. With the best will in the world to destroy 
his species, each man was restricted to a very limited area of activity. 

. It was not until the dawn of the twentieth century of the 
Christian era that war really began to enter into its kindom as the 
potential destroyer of the human race. The organization of mankind 
into great states and empires and the rise of nations to full collective 
consciousness enabled enterprises of slaughter to be planned and executed 
upon a scale and with a perseverance never before imagined. All the 
noblest virtues of individuals were gathered together to strengthen the 
destructive capacity of the mass. ‘Good finances, the resources of world- 
wide credit and trade, the accumulation of large capital reserves, made it 
possible to divert for considerable periods the energies of whole peoples 
to the task of devastation. Democratic institutions gave expression to 
the will power of millions. Education not only brought the course of 
the conflict within the comprehension of everyone, but rendered each 
person serviceable in a high degree for the purpose in hand. The press 
afforded a means of unification and of mutual encouragement; religion, 
having discreetly avoided conflict on the fundamental issues, offered its 
encouragements and consolations, through all its forms, impartially to 
all the combatants. Lastly, science unfolded her treasures and her secrets 
to the desperate demands of men and placed in their hands agencies and 
apparatus almost decisive in their character. 

In consequence many novel features presented themselves. Instead of 
merely starving fortified towns whole nations were methodically sub- 
jected, or sought to be subjected, to the process of reduction by famine. 
The entire population in one capacity or another took part in the war; 
all were equally the object of attack. The air opened paths along which 
death and terror could be carried far behind the lines of the actual 
armies, to women, children, the aged, the sick, who in earlier struggles 
would perforce have been left untouched. Marvelous organization of 
railroads, steamships, and motor vehicles placed and maintained tens 
of millions of men continuously in action. Healing and surgery in their 
exquisite developments returned them again and again to the shambles. 
Nothing was wasted that could contribute to the process of waste. The 
last dying kick was brought into military utility. . 

It is in these circumstances that we have entered upon that period 
of exhaustion which has been described as peace. It gives us at any 
rate an opportunity to consider the general situation. Certain somber 


15 


facts emerge solid, inexorable, like the shapes of mountains from drifting 
mist. It is established that henceforward whole populations will take 
part in war, all doing their utmost, all subjected to the fury of the enemy. 
It is established that nations who believe their life is at stake will not be 
restrained from using any means to secure their existence. It is probable 
—nay, certain—that among the means which will next time be at their 
disposal will be agencies and processes of destruction wholesale, un- 
limited, and perhaps, once launched, uncontrollable. 

Such, then, is the peril with which mankind menaces itself. Means of 
destruction incalculable in their effects, wholesale and frightful in their 
character, and unrelated to any form of human merit; the march of 
science unfolding ever more appalling possibilities; and the fires of 
hatred burning deep in the hearts of some of the greatest people of the 
world, fanned by continual provocation and unceasing fear and fed by 
the deepest sense of national wrong or national danger! On the other 
hand, there is the blessed respite of exhaustion, offering to the nations 
a final chance to control their destinies and avert what may well be a 


general doom. 
Winston S. Churchill, “Shall We Commit Suicide?” 


16 


V—RACE DISTINCTIONS 


RACE SUPERIORITY A UNIVERSAL CLAIM 


It is an interesting fact that in behalf of each separate human race 
the claim of superiority has been made. We need not go beyond the list 
of present races as the color ethnologists define them. 


American Indians 


The red people when they first met the whites were compelled to 
recognize and gradually submit to their power. But they held the firm 
conviction of their own racial superiority. Jedediah Morse relates in the 
American Universal Geography, published in Boston in 1796, a story 
told in 1766 at a salt lick in Ohio to Col. G. Morgan, by an old Indian 
chief, eighty-four years of age, who was the head of a party of Iroquois 
and Wyandot Indians. 

“After the Great Spirit formed the world, he made the various 
birds and beasts which now inhabit it. He also made man, but hav- 
ing formed him white and very imperfect and ill-tempered he placed 
him on one side of it where he now inhabits and from whence he 
has lately found a passage across the water to be a plague to us. 
As the Great Spirit was not pleased with this, his work, he took of 
black clay and made what you call a Negro with a woolly head. 
This black man was made better than the white man, but still he 
did not answer the wish of the Great Spirit; that is, he was im- 
perfect. At last, the Great Spirit, having procured a piece of pure 
red clay, formed from it the Red Man, ‘perfectly to his mind, and 
he was so well pleased with him that he placed him on this great 
island, separate from the white and black men; and gave him rules 
for his conduct, promising happiness in proportion as they should 
be observed. He increased exceedingly and was perfectly happy 
for ages; but the foolish young people, at length forgetting his rules, 
became exceedingly ill-tempered and wicked. In consequence of this, 
the Great Spirit created the great buffaloes, the bones of which 
you now see before us; these made war upon the human species 
alone, and destroyed all but a few, who repented and promised the 
Great Spirit to live according to his laws if he would restrain the 
devouring enemy. Whereupon he sent lightning and thunder and 
destroyed the whole race in this spot, but excepted a male and 
female which he shut up in yonder mountain, ready to let loose 
again, should occasion require.” 


Chinese 


The Chinese when they first met the white races were entirely assured 
of the unique and primary place of the yellow people and for generations 
treated the Western nations with pride and scorn. And who can deny 
the grounds of their judgment? They have been for ages the great 
center of light and civilization in Central and Eastern Asia. They have 
given literature and religion to the millions of Korea and Japan. Even 
a generation of Western civilization has not shaken Chinese influence off 
the thought and politics and ethics of Japan. Printing originated with 
the Chinese, and was used by them hundreds of years before it was 
known in the West. The magnetic needle, gunpowder, silk fabrics, china- 
ware and porcelain were old tales with the Chinese before our civiliza- 
tion began. Our latest ideas were wrought out by the Chinese ages ago,— 


17 


Civil Service examinations and assignment of office for merit and tested 
capacity, trades unions and organizations, the sense of local responsibility 
in municipal administration. lt is not to be wondered at that China has 
always looked down upon the other races and deemed them barbarians. 
And even after contact with the Western races this conviction remained. 
“Western nations, taken as a whole, do not impress educated Chinese with 
a sense of the superiority of such nations to China.” ; 


Japanese 


And the other great branch of the yellow race, the Japanese, although 
they are clearly a mixture of the yellow and the brown races, swinging 
down through the Chosen peninsula and up from the Dravidian areas in 
the islands to the south, are even more sure of their racial ascendency. 
The Japanese race is heaven-descended. “The Emperors of our country,” 
says Dr. Kakehi, “are persons equipped with qualities without parallel 
in the world; they are both the centers of (religious) faith and of 
temporal power. The center of this phenomenal world is the Mikado’s 
land (Mi-kuni, ie, Japan). From this center we must expand this 
Great Spirit throughout the world.” Kakehi declares with enthusiasm, 
“There are voices which cry, ‘Great Japan is the Land of the Gods.’ 
Nor is this to be wondered at. It is a true statement of fact. It is a 
matter of course. The expansion of Great Japan throughout the world 
and the elevation of the entire world into the Land of the Gods is the 
urgent business of the present, and again, it is our eternal and unchang- 
ing object.” 


East Indians 


The Indian leaders, however they approve or endure the preservation 
of race and caste distinction in India, do not concede for a moment the 
superiority of the white race or of white civilization. The current 
tendency of thought in India is contempt for Western culture and the 
exaltation of the past of India. Rabindranath Tagore is only one, al- 
though he is in the West the best known, of the spokesmen of the mind 
of India. . . . Hear his injunction to his countrymen after he has 
summed up the horrors of modern civilization: 

Be not ashamed, my brothers, to stand before the proud and the 
powerful 

With your white robe of simpleness. 

Let your crown be of humility, your freedom the freedom of 


the soul. 

Build God’s throne daily upon the ample bareness of your 
poverty, 

And know that what is huge is not great and pride is not 
everlasting. 


Robert E. Speer, “Race and Race Relations.” 


NO BIOLOGICAL DIFFERENCE 


There is practical agreement among the best authorities that there 
is no such thing in the world today as race in the zoological sense of a 
pure breed or strain. There has been incessant intermingling of types. 
In the actual state of the world, one eminent authority tells us, the word 
“race” is a vague formula, to which nothing definite may be found to 
correspond. On the one hand, the original races can only be said to be- 
long to palaeontology; while the more limited groups, now called races, 
are nothing but peoples, or societies of peoples, brethren by civilization 


18 


more than by blood. Peoples, that is, actual groups occupying definite 
geographical areas, are the only realities. 

Among anthropologists there is great divergence of view as to what 
physical features should be made the basis of classification of mankind. 
Keane, in his standard work which has been quoted, makes the character 
of the hair the basis of classification. Another basis is the measurement 
of the skull, and many other tests have been proposed. Such classifica- 
tions serve a useful purpose and increase our knowledge, but they furnish 
no answer to the crucial question whether the particular race-mark selected 
carries with it any other elements of the inheritance. In the present 
state of knowledge it is a pure assumption to suppose that particular men- 
tal or moral qualities are invariably associated in inheritance with any 
particular physical feature. Mr. R. R. Marett, reader in social anthro- 
pology in the University of Oxford, tells us that while the discovery of 
a race-mark about which there could be no mistake has always been a 
dream of the anthropologist, “it is a dream that shows no signs of coming 
true.” Theories which attempt to isolate a racial factor and find in it 
the explanation of civilization are highly speculative and have little of 
the cautious attitude which belongs to true science. 

J. H. Oldham, “Christianity and the Race Problem.” 


VERDICT OF SCIENCE 


We shall have to set aside many of our old ideas on the subject. 
Neither in respect alone of color, nor of descent, nor even of the posses- 
sion of high intellectual capacity, can science give us any warrant for 


speaking of one race as superior to another. 
Benjamin Kidd, “The Control of the Tropics.” 


HEREDITY AND CIVILIZATION 


The increasing interval between civilization and savagery does not de- 
pend upon inborn heredity. The science of civilization has almost nothing 
to do with the facts of inborn heredity. So far from civilization being 
practically unchangeable or only changeable through influences operating 
slowly over long periods of time, the world can be changed in a brief 
space of time. Within the life of a single generation it can be made to 
undergo changes so profound, so revolutionary, so permanent, that it 
would almost appear as if human nature itself had been completely altered 
in the interval. 

Benjamin Kidd, “The Science of Power.” 


CAUCASIAN SUPERIORITY 


A very fruitful cause of racial bitterness is found in the feelings of 
superiority on the one hand, and of inferiority on the other, which are 
apt to be engendered by the existing political and economic predominance 
of the western peoples. The white man’s claim to superiority is not, as 
we shall see later, peculiar to any one race. But in the outward facts of 
the world as it appears to-day the white man seems to find special justi- 
fication for his claim. The marvelous discoveries of physical science 
which have transformed the conditions of human life are his achieve- 
ment. It has been his energy and daring which have explored uncharted 
seas and opened up new continents. He has built railways and roads, 
bridged estranging oceans with the steamship, the cable and wireless 
telegraphy, and finally achieved the conquest of the air. His enterprise 


19 


has built ap modern industry and a worldwide commerce and placed 
within the reach of ordinary people products from every quarter of the 
globe. He has seen hundreds of millions submissively accept his rule - 
and yield to his greater knowledge and capacity. It is not surprising 
that he should regard himself as standing in a class apart. 

This attitude, while it is one of the most fruitful causes of irritation, 
is not, strictly speaking, racial. It is the expression in the relations be- 
tween different races of a temper which has commonly characterized the 
possessors of social advantage. Aristocracies have almost always jeal- 
ously guarded their privileges and prided themselves on the blue blood 
which they alone possessed. 

J. H. Oldham, “Christianity and the Race Problem.” 


NORDIC SUPERIORITY A MYTH 


The arguments that have been used, mainly by American authors, to 
support the theory that the Nordic race is superior to the other races of 
mankind are quite valueless. They have simply been invented to prove 
what was already an article of faith. Very few of the world’s greatest 
men have been Nordic in race. The great majority of them, including 
the greatest men of British stock, have belonged to either the Semitic or 
the Mediterranean race. The arguments, similarly, that are based on eco- 
nomic considerations are, as has already been shown, as wholly irrelevant. 
Whether they are right or wrong, those who believe in the colour line be- 
lieve, not because they have been convinced by economic considerations or 
by ethnological researches, but because they feel they are right in so 
believing. And that belief is held passionately by millions. 

Norman Leys, “Kenya.” 


RACIAL CAPACITY FOR PROGRESS 


This fact of overlapping between the races is of immense importance 
for our subject. It means that in intelligence and virtue, in capacity to 
further human progress, race is not a dividing line. To belong to a 
particular race is not in itself a mark of either superiority or inferiority. 
No race is preordained by reason of its inferior capacity to occupy as a 
race a position of permanent subordination. To demand this is to go in 
the teeth of the facts. When men are judged as men they do not sort . 
themselves out according to race. The demand for equality is at bottom 
the assertion of this irrepressible human claim to be judged, considered 
and treated as aman. This claim is from its nature something that will 
not down. It is the central instinct of human nature, in which all partic- 
ular impulses combine and find their meaning—the will to live, to grow, 
to develop to the full capacity of manhood. 

J. H. Oldham, “Christianity and the Race Problem.” 


AFRICAN INFERIORITY DENIED 


Most people imagine that the fact of Africans believing things we have 
disproved proves their mental inferiority to Europeans. Anthropology 
proves that such ideas prevailed, even with astonishing identity as to de- 
tail, in every human group, tribal, national and racial. And there is no 
scrap of evidence to suggest that mental capacity and ability in any group 
have improved in the course of the evolution of its ideas. The opinion 
of scientists, anthropologists and philosophers alike is that the minds of 
our ancestors five thousand years ago.were not inferior to our own. Our 


20 


sole gain lies in a laboriously acquired and precariously as well as labor- 
iously transmitted mass of knowledge and ideas and habits, no part of 
which is ever the sole achievement of any single man or of any isolated 
community. No one owes his mental heritage to his own ancestors alone. 
He is in debt to the whole civilized world . . . Those who wish to 
examine the available evidence on the question of the character and capa- 
city of Africans as a race must consult “The Black Man’s Place in South 
Africa,” by Peter Nielsen. It is the first impartial and scientific invest- 
igation of the relevant facts to be published. 

Norman Leys, “Kenya.” 


ALL RACES INFERIOR 


A so-called inferior race is simply a race which has not yet enjoyed 
the education and felt the influences which would lift it to the level of its 
potential happiness and serviceableness. And in this sense all races are 
still inferior. 

It is a good thing for each race and for all the world that there has 
not been any dead level of racial attainment, but that all have had to 
struggle together and with various measures of speed in their achievement 
and against various forms of difficulty and hindrance. May not the rich- 
ness and sternness of each race’s struggle for self-realization, if its spirit 
is pure of hatred and false pride, make only the larger its contribution 


to the whole life of humanity ? 
Robert E. Speer, “Of One Blood.” 


WHY DIFFERENT RACES? 


What then was the idea of making different races? 

There is nothing so flat as uniformity. The sound of one reiterated 
note is maddening. That is what makes us want to strangle the piano- 
tuner. There is only one way to get rich full harmony in music or jin any- 
thing else and that is by the blend of different notes. The thrill of a 
really great picture lies not in uniformity of colour, nor in the clash of 
colour, but in the complement and blend of contrast and colour. 

Another and a perfect picture of this tremendous truth is that of the 
arms and feet, ears and eyes and all members of the body, each different 
from the other ; all of varying powers; not at all equal in the sense of 
identical; yet all alike essential to the full body; each contributing to the 
body; and in return the body as a whole giving life and meaning to each 
member of it. . . 

We are of different races, though of the same blood, because God 
meant us to be different so that we should each contribute to the world’s 
life—just as He meant the colours to be different that we might have 
beauty in landscape, and the sounds different that we might have beauty 


in the song of birds. 
Basil Mathews, “The Clash of Color.” 


RACIAL DIFFERENCES 


The recognition of differences, which is essential for wise action, is 
made difficult in practice by the wrong attitude of men towards one 
another. That attitude must be changed before we can do justice to the 
facts. We are prevented from even considering them with sufficient 
detachment and calmness of mind by our lack of the right spirit. In a 
family, the members of which differ in their gifts, it is the equal con- 


21 


cern of ail to ascertain as accurately as possible the capacity of each, 
in order that each may be given the work he can do best for his own 
self-fulfilment and for the good of the family as a whole. So in regard 
to racial differences, if the same spirit prevailed knowledge of the facts 
would be in the interests of all. The enquiry into differences could be 
pursued without heat or passion. The reason why questions of racial 
superiority and racial equality give rise to such embittered controversy 
is that superior advantages, whether native or acquired, are made the 
means of domination, instead of being used as an opportunity of service. 
Differences and inequalities are part of the constitution of the world; 
what lies in our power is the spirit in which we deal with them. 

Before we close this chapter a few words must be said about the 
second question with which we started—the question of the standard to 
be applied when one race is compared with another. The comparison 
has no meaning unless we are agreed in what superiority consists. Is 
the winner of the Derby superior to a dray horse? Is the victor in a 
hundred yards race a superior athlete to the winner of the three miles? 
Each is supreme in his own sphere. Is the engineer superior to the poet, 
or the scientific chemist to the captain of industry, or the prophet who 
stirs the conscience of a people to the practical statesman who trans- 
lates ideals into actual legislation? Or shall we say that the world needs 
all of them and that comparison is futile? . . . 

Every people, just because it is different from others in its natural 
endowment and its historical experience, has its own peculiar angle of 
vision from which it looks out on reality, and has thereby its own con- 
tribution to make to the full understanding of our own universe. “No 
one organism,” William James has reminded us, “can possibly yield to 
its owner the whole body of truth.” The psychopathic temperament, for 
example, may open the door “to corners of the universe, which your 
robust Philistine type of nervous system, forever offering its biceps to 
be felt, thumping its breast, and thanking Heaven that it hasn’t a single 
morbid fibre in its composition, would be sure to hide forever from its 
self-satisfied possessors.” In proportion to the largeness and richness of 
our estimate of the possibilities of human nature, we shall be slow to 
deny to any race the possibility of rendering some distinctive and in- 
Salas contribution to the growth and achievement of humanity as 
a whole. 

J. H. Oldham, “Christianity and the Race Problem.” 


APPRECIATING OTHER RACES 


Our minds are able to go back in imagination to those days beyond 
the frontiers of human history when migrations from the original group 
began to separate and differentiate the people of the earth. Humanity 
that started as one became geographically separated by deserts and moun- 
tain ranges and vast seas. The long, steady influence of climate and of 
geographic conditions picked out and accentuated variations in tempera- 
ment and ability. Various social situations called forth different customs, 
different estimates of value, different philosophies of life. Variations 
in virility, geographic environment and historic circumstance allowed 
ne groups to forge ahead, and contributed to the backwardness of 
others. 

The most romantic days of history have at last brought these distant 
cousins into vital communication. Thousands of years of separation 
under the most diverse conditions enable each people today to bring its 
special gift to the common store—the best of each for the good of all. 
Books, people, and the products of industry—like myriad flying shuttles— 
are busy weaving the web of a re-unified humanity. In the interpenetra- 


22 


ion of the East and the West we see one of the most significant facts 
of modern days. We catch a glimpse of a fellowship richer and more 
fruitful than anything the world has yet seen, in which every function 
will be spiritualized because of the recognition that it is for the whole. 
Thus four kinds of relationships may be distinguished in our contact 
with other countries: the blind ignorance of isolation and prejudice; 
the dawning recognition of values; a time of suspicion, fear and rivalry; 
and a final confidence in the certainty of helpful interchange. We are 
entering the fourth relationship where we acknowledge that we can 
learn from other people as well as they from us; that the ideal is 
mutual stimulation and cross-fertilization of culture, and that the better 
world will be achieved only when all work together for common goals 
in the light of common experience. It is a stage characterized by the 
recognition of interdependence and mutual obligation, when no member 
of the world team will trip the other up, but will pass to him the ball. 
Daniel Johnson Fleming, “Whither Bound in Missions.” 


CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE RACES 


I remember how Professor Sargent of Chicago University used to 
tell his pupils that out of five specified elements of art, China surpassed 
the West in four. . The perusal of Chinese Painters by Raphael Petrucci, 
or of the Chinese poems translated by Mr. Waley will convince any one 
that we have much more to learn from them than mah jong. In their 
guild system, employer and employees were found in the same democratic 
group, and cooperation between these two groups had displaced competi- 
tion, at the stage of development industry had then reached. In the 
Chinese passion for “saving face,” there is an element of respect for 
personality. At their best, her literati have a noticeable quietness, a 
poise, a peace. China has had its wars, but unlike the West, it can be 
said that down through the centuries the “best people’ did not approve 
of them, the soldier being the lowest member of their social hierarchy. 

We are indebted to Japan for manifold creations from her sense of 
beauty, and for high individual and national embodiments of politeness. 
In India we find patience, gentleness, and an age-long quest for oneness 
with reality; in Africa forbearance and cheerfulness; in Latin America 
quickness of perception, acuteness and analysis, and high flights of imagi- 
nation. All over the Orient we see how people are devotedly fond of 
children, how all are wonderfully hospitable to strangers and guests: and 
how all (unless they have come too much in contact with the West) are 
beautifully courteous. Each land has certain admirable qualities worthy 
of the unfeigned respect of the world. It is a realization of this that 
makes certain references to them as “those great missionary countries” 
sound a little provincial, as though being our parish abroad was their 
raison d’étre. Daniel Johnson Fleming, “Whither Bound in Missions.” 


THREE TRUTHS FROM INDIA 


Amid a labyrinth of seemingly futile imaginings we will trace three 
noble truths for which India has stood down through the centuries: 
That man’s soul is akin to, indeed, is part of, God; that the world is, 
in the last analysis, spiritual, not material; and that the universe is just. 

Daniel Johnson Fleming, “Whither Bound in Missions.” 


THE COMMON STOCK OF CIVILIZATION 


Rabindranath Tagore valued his Nobel Prize as a recognition of in- 
dividual merit, and still more, so he says, as an acknowledgment that 


a 


the East is a collaborator with the West in contributing its riches to the 
common stock of civilization. To him it was symbolic of a joining 
of hands in comradeship of the two great hemispheres of the human 
world. He pleads with the West in another place “to tell us (India) 
that the world has need of us; not where we are petty but where we 
can help with the force of our life to rouse the world in wisdom, love 
and work, in the expansion of insight, knowledge and mutuality.” 
Daniel Johnson Fleming, “Whither Bound in Missions.” 


EQUALITY AND BROTHERHOOD 


“Equality” does not involve equal attainment nor even—immediately— 
equal political status, any more than the essential equality of boys in 
a school means no prefects and no fags. “Brotherhood” does not neces- 
sarily mean intermarriage. Equality and brotherhood do mean, how- 
ever, equal justice and the opportunity to develop and exercise all the 
faculties given to each man by God. They do not mean that all the men 
in a college get into the Rugby or cricket team or pull off a First Class 
in Final Schools; but that all the men have an equal chance, and can 
develop and exercise every faculty of body, mind and spirit; and that 
they all belong to the school and it to them. 

Basil Mathews, “The Clash of Color.” 


INTER-RACIAL FRIENDSHIPS 


The differences between men, which . . . we recognized to be great 
and real, are differences within a unity. Underlying all differences of 
race there exists a common humanity... . 

Anthropology has made it certain that the basal qualities of the human 
mind are the same among all peoples. There are the same dominant in- 
stincts, the same primary emotions, the same capacity of judgment and 
reason. Men of different races, however widely separated, are able to 
understand one another. They can judge of each other’s motives and 
discriminate character in the other race. The more intimate our contact 
with another people, the more ready we are to endorse the Psalmist’s 
verdict, “He fashioneth their hearts alike.” . . . 

The fact, which is unquestionable, that it is possible for friendships 
to be formed between men of different races as intimate, close and rich 
as between members of the same race shows that there are no insur- 
mountable barriers or fundamental differences between the minds of 
different races. That such friendships are rare under present circum- 
stances is not surprising; but that they exist is conclusive evidence that 
underneath all differences of natural endowment and of tradition there 
is the same fundamental constitution of mind and disposition. 

J. H. Oldham, “Christiantty and the Race Problem.” 


FORGETTING OUR DIFFERENCES 


When men find themselves in the presence of some pressing danger, 
superficial differences are for the time lost sight of amid the realities 
of their common humanity. The human qualities of courage, endurance, 
faithfulness are in a real emergency, a bond that makes differences of 
face ‘seem of no account ae a. . 

A story illustrative of . . . (this) is told in a recently published 
article on Shakespeare and the Zulu by Sir Frank Benson. 

“A British officer had been sent forward in some fighting with the 
Zulus leading a contingent of men. The Zulus sent out a messenger of 


24 


peace. By an unhappy blunder the British outposts shot him. The 
British officer was greatly distressed. So he handed over the contingent 
to the second in command, and walked straight out, unarmed, to the 
Zulu lines. He was led to the chief. 

“«T have come,’ he said, ‘to give myself up because we shot your peace 
messenger by mistake. It is a thing brave warriors never do. I am very 
sorry. To make amends I place my life in your hands; do with me as 
you will.’ 

“The Zulu warrior chief was silent for a moment, then he said: ‘You 
are a man, and your people are men and the sons of men; we too are 
men. We will make peace.’ ” 

J. H. Oldham, “Christianity and the Race Problem.” 


ALL ONE IN GOD 


That any two human beings are coequally children of their Father 
is a vastly more significant, truth than that one is a Jew and the other 
a Greek. Once catch a vision of man’s common relationship to the one 
source, God, and we see that the realm in which we share is vastly 
larger than ‘the realm in which we differ. In all the mystery of our 
origin, in all the vastness of our resources, in all the hope for life ahead, 
we are conjoined with every other human being. What in comparison 
is the differing social status of master or slave? If woman must be 
born again in the form of man in order to be saved, as is held in popu- 
lar Hinduism, if she is a distinctly lower order of being as in Africa, 
then of course the distinction of male and female is enormously and 
far-reachingly significant. But if through Christ we see the reality 
of the spiritual oneness of man and woman, and contemplate their com- 
mon privilege of living the eternal life in time under the care and by 
the power of God, this common dignity overshadows and ennobles every 
other thing. 

Sometimes a catastrophe brings about this consciousness of simple 
humanity. When Robinson Crusoe first saw the man Friday, the fact 
that they were fellow-humans was more dominating than color or creed. 
When the earth’s crust shakes and terror drives people from their homes, 
the members of the heterogeneous company huddled in a place of refuge 
are more conscious of their common human frailty before this mighty 
force than they are of old distinctions that loomed so large in days 
of safety when they forgot their God. 

But what the earthquake can do for a night, Christ can make an 
abiding attitude. Fellowship with him gives a spiritual perspective that 
is vital for all time. The world must catch from him the overwhelmingly 
greater significance of what unites rather than of what separates man- 
kind. Those individuals and those nations who really try to follow 
him will find amongst themselves an identity of interest and of aim 
that will command attention, to the exclusion or correction of the things 
which now divide. 


Daniel Johnson Fleming, “Marks of a World Christian.” 


25 


VI—NATIONALISM AND INTERNATIONALISM 


NO EAST; NO WEST 


There is no East and there is no West today. Commerce and com- 
munication have broken down the barriers. The World is coming to- 
gether. It is not growing apart. The World is one. The Occident and 
the Orient must stand or fall together. The White Man and the Yellow | 
Man must join hands and march together into a greater and more glori- 


ous future, or else go down to doom together. There is no other choice. 
Baron Matsui. 


WORLD UNITY 


The world is now One, one in a sense in which it was never one be- 
fore. Five-sixths of the human race were involved in the Great War, 
which brought men to fight one another in regions where civilized armies 
had never contended before, in West Africa, in East Africa, in Siberia 
and Turkestan, on the shores of the Baikal and the Caspian, in the isles 
of the Western Pacific, while ships of war were fighting on all the oceans 
from the White Sea to the Falkland Isles. As this unity was apparent 
in war, so it is apparent now the war has ended. Everything that affects 
industry and commerce in one country affects it in every other, and 
affects it instantaneously, so widespread and so swift have communica- 
tions become. Electricity is the most potent of the unifying forces for 
the purposes of knowledge and interchange of thought, as steam began 
to be for commerce a century ago. This is a fact which has “come to 
stay.” The human race, whatever the differences between its branches, 
is now a unit for economic purposes, and as economics have now be- 
come a chief basis of politics, it is a unit for the purposes of international 
diplomacy. We see the germs of political strife in the claims made to 
the enjoyment of such sources of natural wealth, wherever they are 
found, as coal and oil. 

. . . Since every people, every civilized State, is now a member of 
one all-embracing community, everything which affects any single State 
necessarily affects each of the others, primarily its economic situation, 
and through its economic its political situation also, its industry and its 
finance, its interchange of products with other countries. Think of the 
currency and the effects which rates of exchange have upon the relations 
of the Old World States not only to one another but to the Western 
hemisphere also. All States are now members of one economic body, 
and if one member suffers the other members suffer with it. The well- 
being of one people never permanently injures any other people, but 
the misfortune and miseries of any great people injure every other peo- 
ple that is in political or commercial relations with the sufferers. The 
wealth that was destroyed in the Great War, accumulated by the labor 
of many peoples during many years, was a loss to all the peoples, and 
every future war will be an evil to all of them, and certainly not least 
to those which are now most advanced in prosperity and most sensitive 
to whatever disturbs the processes of peaceful production and exchange. 
Credit and security are now the things most needed for the economic 
recovery of the world. Security is the pre-condition to the reestablish- 
ment of sound business conditions anywhere and everywhere. 

James Bryce, “International Relations.” 


INTERNATIONALISM AND SELF-INTEREST 


Every civilized nation, since its fortunes are inextricably involved 
with the good or evil fortunes of every other, is bound for its own 


26 


sake to take an interest in the well-being of the others and to help them, 
in whatever way it finds best, to avoid or to recover from disasters. 
The greatest of disasters is War, more terrible in its consequence than 
earthquakes in Sicily or famines in China. 

A nation or any number of nations, may stand aloof when it or they 
see the disaster of war approaching, ‘and may think it to their interest 
not to make any effort, or to join in efforts made by others, to avert 
the disaster. That is a matter which each State decides for itself. But 
if the disaster comes, the States that do not join will suffer, more or 
less in proportion to their own wealth and prosperity, in the conse- 
quences which war brings upon the world, for that which affects some 
cannot but affect all, all being now in the economic, if not in the Chris- 
tian, sense, members of one body. Credit declines; security disappears. 

War therefore injures all States, and as the sources of war reside 
in those faults of human nature which are common to all, though at 
some particular moment more violently potent in one people than in 
another, so the work of trying to remove or reduce those sources is a 
task which will succeed, or fail, in proportion to the number of peoples 
that join in it and in proportion to the spirit in which they make those 
efforts. 

James Bryce, “International Relations.” 


SOLIDARITY OF THE HUMAN RACE 


When men say with Meredith Townsend that “Something radical, 
something unalterable and indestructible, divides the Asiatic from the 
European, . . . they are fenced off from each other by an invisible, 
impalpable, but impassable wall as rigid and inflexible as that which 
divides the master from his dog,” they are forming the background in 
thought for racial war. It is the denial of the implications of mankind’s 
unity in one family that makes nationalism dangerous. On the other 
hand, the thorough-going acceptance of those implications would crowd 
out selfish suspicion and aggression, while dignifying and ennobling na- 
tional individuality and attainment. Success in the acceptance of the 
truth may be tested by the mutual attitudes between peoples. 

- It is a growing realization of this truth that is causing a gradual disuse 
of the word “foreign” in connection with missions. With one blood, 
one human family, there can be no sharp line between obligation to 
community, to nation, and to the world. It is that larger outreach, how- 
ever, which we have known as foréign missions, that preeminently makes 
its great heroic venture on the fundamental soundness of the postulate 
of today’s teaching. Foreign missionaries act on the conviction that 
the solidarity of the human race in Ged’s family is true; they thereby 
perne the most powerful agents for creating the realization of that 
truth. 

Daniel Johnson Fleming, “Marks of a World Christian.” 


BOUND UP IN ONE BUNDLE 


As General Smuts has said, “The cardinal fact of geography in the 
twentieth century is the shortening of distances and the shrinking of the 
globe. The result is that problems which a century or even fifty years 
ago were exclusively European now concern the whole world.” . . 

World transport of foods, fabrics and ideas has made the whole world 
one body: it has broken down age- -long divisions and brought us all to- 
gether. The railway and the steamship are like the pulsating arteries 
in a body carrying the blood of humanity to and fro; the cables and the 


27 


wireless are like the nerves, flashing ideas from brain to finger and 
foot, and sensations from limb back to brain. 

When the schoolboys of A.D. 2200 read in theis textbooks about this 
age of ours, they will discover that in our century for the first time in 
all human history “all nations of men that dwell on the face of the 
whole earth” were bound up in the bundle of life together. 

Basil Mathews, “The Clash of Color.” 


INTERDEPENDENCE OF NATIONS 


Even before the War thoughtful minds were noting the increasing 
interdependence of nations. They saw the streams of student life flow- 
ing from every land toward the great centers of Western learning. 
Hookworm was found to prevail all round the world; and its eradica- 
tion must include the planet. Both the tares and the wheat of one field 
pass over into the next, for thistles as well as maple seeds have wings. 
So, too, in child philanthropy the mill conditions of Japan and China 
must be considered, as well as those of America and England. The 
thinking and the acting of a world are reported to our doors each morn- 
ing for a mere pittance. Great human causes like the woman’s movement 
and the spirit of democracy are surging through the world, calling for 
a new breadth of vision and depth of wisdom. There are no longer any 
foreign nations—there are those with different languages and customs, 
but they are all right at our door. No longer do we speak of sundering 
seas; the oceans have become a bond. Inextricably linked up are we with 
a world society of immeasurable intricacy, complexity, and pervasiveness. 

Damiel Johnson Fleming, “Marks of a World Christian.” 


INTERCOURSE BETWEEN NATIONS 


Civilised life is not and never has been the private possession or the 
achievement of one nation. Intercourse between nations is essential to 
it; for if one nation conquered all others and destroyed them utterly, in 
one generation the conquerors would sink back into barbarism. But 
civilised life is not secure. We cannot “rest on our oars.” The food 
and clothing we use, the science and the art we have inherited, may all 
be lost again in some general confusion or through a succession of more 
and more destructive wars . . . Vague sentiments of friendship are 
not such good bases for peace as the general appreciation of what we 
have gained from international intercourse in the past; and what will 
make peace most secure in the future is the general sense that everyone 
will lose if the peaceful intercourse between nations is interrupted. The 
immediate policy of peace, then, is to increase intercourse and co-opera- 
tion between peoples so greatly that no one will be willing to forfeit 
the benefits derived from such intercourse. 

C. Delisle Burns, “A Short History of International Intercourse.” 


WHAT MAKES A COUNTRY GREAT? 


Indeed a country is “great” in proportion to the value of its services 
to other countries. In the history of the past, the record of the services 
of our nation for the advancement of civilised life is the best proof of 
its greatness; and our greatest men are those who have conquered dis- 
ease among foreign nations as well as in their own land, or those who 
have illuminated men of all countries by works of art—not those who 
have killed foreigners or obstructed intercourse. So now, the greatness 


28 


of our country will depend upon what we can do for the world at large; 
and patriotism should now be devotion to one’s country in this service. 
Thus the history of intercourse between peoples makes a man value his 
own country more highly. In the many tasks that the past has left un- 
finished, England or France or Italy has great deeds still to do, if 
Englishmen or Frenchmen or Italians are willing. 

C. Delisle Burns, “A Short History of International Intercourse.” 


ETHNOCENTRISM 


Now the ease with which each group nourishes its own pride and 
vanity and boasts itself superior to all outsiders, is a very widespread 
phenomenon. Each people is likely to scorn the things in which other 
peoples differ from themselves. African tribes think it a huge joke 
that white people do not know their language; to the older Chinese, 
the Middle Kingdom was the yolk of the egg, and other lands were the 
specks here and there in the albumen; while we take it for granted that 
our fair skin and our particular kind of hair are absolute marks of 
group superiority. So common is this tendency for a people to regard 
those traits as superior which are peculiar to themselves that a name— 
ethnocentrism—has been given it. 

Daniel Johnson Fleming, “Marks of a World Christian.” 


NARROW NATIONALISM 


Unfortunately, the new nationalism has taken unattractive forms wher 
we might have expected better things. We see it manifest itself in the 
unseemly wrangling of the European nations since the war, in the 
strife of the Allies among themselves over the division of the spoils, 
with slight regard for Europe as a whole. The Treaty of Versailles 
is a failure because it was built on the exaggerated ego of states; 
because it registers the ungoverned appetite for aggrandizement rather 
than the wisdom of statecraft. It defeated its own ends when it broke 
up the fellowship of ancient states by tearing them asunder into mean- 
ingless and isolated fragments. We see it, as Mr. Charles W. Wood 
has pointed out, in the international scramble for markets, “every nation 
doing all it can to embarrass every other nation with tariffs, special 
agreements and the like.” We see it, as the liberal economists remind 
us, in an inflated idea of self-sufficiency now current, “every country 
striving to produce every conceivable commodity within its own fron- 
tiers,” instead of the old-time reliance upon an international division of 
labor. We see still another unattractive form of the new nationalism in 
the absurd theory that a nation has room for only one people, one culture 
within its boundaries. We see it manifest in the sincere, yet oft-time 
misdirected ardor of the East Indian leaders, aflame with the patriotic 
fire of their young nationalism. We see it in the unworthy and im- 
possible policy of isolation which our American politicians adopted after 
the superb development of world spirit which characterized our nation 
during the last years of the war. We see it in the base desertion of the 
Armenians, the oldest of the Christians, by the preoccupied and self- 
seeking powers on both sides of the Atlantic. Nationalism, it would ap- 
pear, may be an angel of darkness as well as of light. 

Mr. H. G. Wells raises the question whether a “megalomaniac national- 
ism, a nationalism made aggressive by prosperity,” is likely to prevail. 
Tagore, the Indian poet and philosopher, describes nationalism as “the 
concentrated egotism of the people.” Professor William Lyon Phelps, 
of Yale, strikes an even more vigorous note in an article in Scribner’s: 


29 


“Tf each nation would cease just for five minutes to regard itself as the 
greatest, wisest and noblest collection of men on earth, some general 
advance might be made. It would be a good thing at the next meeting of 
international - representatives, instead of seeing how much each delegate 
could snatch for his country, if they all would get on their knees and 
ask God to forgive them for existing.” 

Cornelius H. Patton, “The Business of Missions.” 


WASHINGTON’S NATIONAL IDEAL 


George Washington had a far vision, and a keen understanding. In 
his farewell address he said: “Observe good faith and justice toward 
all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality 
alike enjoin this conduct; and can it be that good policy does not equally 
enjoin it? It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant 
period a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel 
example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. 
Who can doubt but that in the course of time and things, the fruits of 
such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might 
be lost by a steady adherence to it? Can it be that Providence has con- 
nected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue? The experiment, 
at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human na- 
ture. Alas! it is rendered impossible by its vices!” 


EXTRACTS FROM SPEECHES BY PRESIDENT COOLIDGE 


In an address delivered at Washington on October 24, 1924, in behalf 
of the Near East Relief, President Coolidge said: 


“Europe does not want our benevolences; it does want our help; 
and we are ready to give it. America wants the peace of good will 
and of the Golden Rule—not the peace of force imposed by those 
who have power.” 


The President expressed his desire that America should recognize its 
obligations “to make the world a better neighborhood, and its people 
better neighbors.” “We have no better wish,” he remarked, “than to be 
good and helpful neighbors with all.” In the same address to said: 


“T have no sympathy with those who are unwilling or unable to 
look beyond our shores and who content themselves with an equally 
vague and unmeaning assertion of their Americanism. I reserve my 
approval for those who, while thoroughly American, yet do not pro- 
pose to live unto themselves alone, who are neither oblivious to 
duty or to charity, but who cherish as individuals and as citizens 
the Golden Rule of action among our own people.” 


In another recent address, the President alluded to our Government 
as “a great humanitarian institution.” In his speech of acceptance of the 
Republican nomination to the presidency, an utterance of the most formal 
character, which became in effect the platform of the campaign, Mr. 
Coolidge dealt specifically with foreign relations. He said: 


“This country cannot be isolated, this people believe in the law of 
service.” 
In his message to Congress on December 3, 1924, Mr. Coolidge asserted: 
; “Our country has definitely relinquished the old standard of deal- 
ing with other countries by terror and force, and is definitely com- 


mitted to the new standard of dealing with them through friendship 
and understanding.” 


30 


In an address by Mr. Coolidge before the Chicago Commercial Club, 
on December 4, 1924, he said: 

“{ am profoundly impressed with the fact that the structure of 
modern society is essentially a unity designed to stand or fall as 
such. At the last those of us who are partners in the supreme ser- 
vice of building up and bettering our civilization must go up or 
down, must succeed or fall together in our one common enterprise.” 

In concluding his inaugural address on March 4, 1925, Mr. Coolidge 
said: 

“America seeks no earthly empire built on blood and force. The 
legions which she sends forth are armed not with the sword, but with 
the cross. The higher state to which she seeks the allegiance of all 
mankind is not of human but of divine origin. She cherishes no 
purpose save to merit the favor of Almighty God.” 


LIMITATION OF RULERS 


It must, of course, be admitted that there are some virtuous acts ex- 
pected from the good citizen which cannot be required from the State. 
The rulers of the State are in a certain sense agents and trustees acting 
on behalf of the people, and they are not entitled to go beyond such au- 
thority as the people have entrusted to them. They cannot, for instance, 
be generous with what is not their own, as an individual may be generous 
with his own property. 

I remember once having a conversation with Mr. Gladstone on the 
subject, and he, than whom no statesman ever took a larger and more 
human view of national duty, dwelt upon this limitation. Statesmen, 
he observed, may safely assume that they have a mandate from the people 
to take any action which would promote the people’s interest and may 
also assume that the people will not expect them to do any wrongful act. 
But they may feel doubts as to making concessions to other States which 
a broad-minded man might make if only his own interests were con- 
cerned. “I may do,” he said, “as a private man acts which motives of 
generosity and liberality suggest, and yet not be entitled to do similar 
acts as a Minister at the expense of the nation because I am not sure 
that I am within the authority which the citizens have given me. If I 
wish to go further I ought to consult Parliament and obtain its authori- 
ty.” Expressions of compassion and acts of charity may have to be 
restricted within narrower limits than personal sympathy would suggest, 
but in such cases the statesman is free to consult the representative as- 
sembly of his country and its approval will justify him in believing that 
the generosity or pity he desires to show will be approved by the senti- 
ment of the people at large. 


2 


James Bryce, “International Relations, 


CHRISTIAN PATRIOTISM we 


Now it is Christianity that transmutes selfish nationalism into the 
higher patriotism. Christianity lifts love of country out of its narrow 
parochialism, gives it the larger vision, inspires it with a spirit of world 
service and sends the nation forth into the world to bless and be blessed. 
When the spirit of Jesus takes possession of a selfish man, it transforms 
him. He now loves and serves his fellow-men. So when the spirit of 
Jesus takes possession of a nation, its selfish, provincial, nationalistic 
spirit will be changed into a comprehensive spirit of international good- 
will and service. And that service will involve sacrifice and perhaps 
even suffering. Certain it is that the reconciliation of the nations to one 


fet 


another, and their redemption from the sin and the curse of war, will 
never be accomplished by any selfish nation whose sole ambition is the 
acquisition for itself alone of this world’s goods. What shall it profit a 
nation to gain the whole world and lose its own soul? For lose its soul 
it will, if it conceives the purpose of its endeavors and the reason and 
end of its being to be the attainment of merely selfish desires and am- 
bitions. The true end of a nation as of an individual is service. To 
achieve its highest development and most noble self-realization, a nation 
must give itself to the welfare of fellow-nations. It must lose itself 
to really find itself. 

Christian Patriotism thus has a program of good-will for all the 
nations and races of the world. It seeks not its own prosperity alone 
but that of all. It thinks not of its own achievements alone but it gener- 
ously recognizes the notable and noble achievements of all. It rejoices 
in them and appropriates them in gratitude. In turn it gladly con- 
tributes what it may of its spiritual gains for the welfare of the rest. 
It seeks to overcome suspicion and to build up confidence; it strives to 
overthrow selfishness and to promote generosity; it discourages destruc- 
tive rivalry and cultivates helpful co-operation. It welcomes contacts 
and acquaintance in order to overcome ignorance and prejudice and 
fear, and to beget trust, assurance and mutual good-will. 

The goal of Christian Patriotism is an association of nations, bound 
together by common spiritual ideals and ambitions of service, and 
achieving an ever-developing common life of beauty, truth and goodness. 
For just as an individual can achieve his true goal and rise to his highest 
developments only in association and in friendly interchange of service 
with other individuals, so a nation can achieve its highest ends and 
realize its true goal only in international association and service. 

Sidney L. Gulick, “The Christian Crusade for a Warless World.” 


THE LARGER PATRIOTISM 


We are beginning to realise that the doctrines of the unfettered sov- 
ereignty of the State and of self-sufficing nationalism must both be 
scrapped. Yet all that is vital and healthy in the sentiment of national- 
ism must be preserved. We must seek unity in variety, not in uniformity. 
Political cosmopolitanism has no friends. We are feeling cur way 
towards an internationalism which accepts and respects nationalism but 
transcends it. The larger patriotism is the complement, not the negation, 
of the smaller, as the second story of a building is the completion, not 
the rival of the first. The alternative to unfettered sovereignty is not 
subordination but partnership—the surrender of a portion of power 
in return for participation in a wider, richer and more secure life. 


C. O. P. E. C. Commission Report. 


NATIONAL PRIDE 


Every nation nursed ambitions that could not be realized except 
through war. Russia coveted Constantinople; so did Greece, and like- 
wise Bulgaria. Turkey wanted to retain Constantinople. Great Britain 
wished to control the Dardanelles. This one example shows how general 
the dissatisfaction with the established order was. Again, Germany 
sought to get possession of France’s colonies; France wanted to recover 
Alsace and Lorraine; England wished to extend her dominion from 
Cairo to the Cape. . . . National pride, which in ancient times made 
the Romans, the Greeks, and the Jews consider themselves better than 
other nations,— and it must be admitted that this pride was not without 


32 


reason,—has gradually taken possession of all European nations. Like 
those intolerable individuals who constantly flaunt their imaginary su- 
periority or their achievements in the face of everyone whom they 
meet, the European peoples of to-day have almost without exception 
fallen into the bad habit of self-praise. There is scarcely a country so 
small or unimportant that it does not consider itself the world’s fore- 
most nation. I have heard a little Polish boy returning from school 
ae his mother: “Is it true what teacher says—that Columbus was no 
Pole?” 

“That is right,” said the mother. ‘He was a Genoese.” 

“Oh,” replied the boy, “I thought that all big men were Poles.” 


Georg Brandes, “Living Age,’ March 14, 1925. 


33 


VIL—CIVIEIZATION AND “PEACE 


CIVILIZATION BUILT UPON PEACE 


While there is peace one man talks to another and both grow wiser, 
one sells his spare food in exchange for another’s spare clothing and 
both grow richer and happier. When they are not at peace men use 
force and fraud to destroy or to impoverish other men. Peace, then, 
is the relation between individuals or groups of men, in which they co- 
operate for the advance of knowledge, for artistic production and for 
the improvement of their material circumstances; for all which pur- 
poses it is necessary that violence and fraud should cease. 

The quarrels of individuals and the concerted violence between groups 
of men, called war, have been common enough; and they have made 
the history of humanity appear to be a record of blood and tears. But 
peaceful conditions have been secured within the frontiers of states and 
some advance has been made in securing peace for many years at a 
time even between different peoples. The record of all this achievement 
is political history. The use of peaceiul conditions, however, is as im- 
portant as the method by which they have been secured. Art, science 
and the amenities of life are the true explanations of the value set upon 
law and order and liberty; and the record of the use of peace, therefore, 
is the true history of peace. 

Our present arts, sciences and material resources have been very grad- 
ually and tentatively developed in the exchange of ideas between peoples. 
Thus barbarism has gradually given place to civilization. The process 
can be traced back into the past for many thousand years, and it will 
probably continue after our day for at least as long a time. But there 
have been many crises and many failures in the effort to maintain peace 
and to use it. Sometimes when civilization seemed secure, fraud and 
violence would become again dominant; men would cease to sing and 
paint and build; they would cease to think out the nature of the world 
they lived in, and would be compelled to undertake a painful struggle 
for bare existence. Thus the arts, the knowledge and the wealth of one 
age have often been lost to the next. 

The firmer foundations of the peace we now have were laid by men 
who banded themselves together to resist any marauders, or by one strong 
man in a locality who with his followers kept the control of his district 
in his own hands and therfore kept out any rivals. Men were willing to 
make sacrifices of their labour or their individual power in order to feel 
safer. Sometimes this made matters worse, if the local lord was selfish 
and greedy; but on the whole men learned to act together, and it was less 
easy for any rufhans to take what they wanted or to attack other settle- 
ments. By this means the areas outside the little settlements became 
safer. The fields extended, more settlements were made, and different 
towns and villages were brought under the power of one lord. Thus 
peace was beginning to cover larger areas and to include more men, wom- 
en and children. The townsfolk built walls around their town and kept 
a look-out over the fields outside, where they grew their food. In the 
wilder parts, on hills or at the crossing of trade-routes, castles were 
built and ruled by local lords; and the number of wandering marauders 
became less. So men had time to grow more corn, to trade in wool, and 
to improve their skill as smiths and saddlers. Peace was spreading. 

C. Delisle Burns, “A Short History of International Intercourse.” 


MERCHANTS VS. DIPLOMATISTS 


During the Renaissance a system of continuous communication between 
Governments had developed, which we now call diplomacy. Ambassadors 


34 


and Secretaries concerned themselves with what was happening in foreign 
countries; but the people of each country never thought of the people of 
another country as neighbours. Government, therefore, stopped at fron- 
tiers, and across frontiers there was at best a nodding acquaintance in 
diplomacy, at worst a snarling and growling and rattling of sabres. Of 
course merchants crossed frontiers and sold goods just as though for- 
eigners were not devils; and artists and scholars were actually helped 
across frontiers by Governments. But most people believed that, in spite 
of commerce, art and science, Governments were naturally opposed ; and 
Thomas Hobbes, who owed his own ideas partly to his visits to France, 
declared that the only duty of Governments toward foreigners was to 


keep them out. 
C. Delisle Burns, “A Short History of International Intercourse.” 


OUTGROWING WAR 


Some people say that, apart from the occasionally righteous cause of 
War, it is in itself a good thing. William James, in his Moral Equivalent 
for War, declares that, in spite of its horror and folly, and its uncon- 
structive hardships, war, like a rough schoolmaster, has taught us our 
spiritual A B C’s of courage, honor, obedience, patriotism, and fine dis- 
dain for mere existence. Of course, as we were climbing upward from 
primeval slime, this teaching was valuable—more valuable than just living. 

But Doctor James says we have gone so for beyond our gross teacher 
that now, to acquire spiritual qualities, we no longer need to be clubbed 
to death physically. He suggests a method of conserving the moral 
splendor of War, and sloughing its silliness and brutality: “namely con- 
scription for industrial service to the nation (for a limited period) of 
all Youth: “Service under military discipline in the dangerous and dis- 
agreeable occupations of national and civic life.” 

Margaret Deland, “The Great Determination.” 


her muotorOR CIVILIZATION 


We have come upon a time which men often compare to the later gen- 
erations of Roman history. Just as, in that older time, there was need 
for the spirit of Christianity in the world, so now there is need for a re- 
vival of faith, a dedication to the works which that revived faith would 
show to us as the need of the race, and a renewal of the spirit of 
brotherhood at all times and in all places. 

The Christian nations have become, in an intensely practical as well as 
a highly spiritual sense, charged with a great trust for civilization. They 
are the custodians of a faith which, despite momentary lapses and some 
perversions, has on the whole been a continuing inspiration to human bet- 
terment. Where it has gone, there the light of a better understanding 
has shown. There the works of charity, of benevolence, of mutual help- 
fulness, have prospered. Intolerance has been lessened. Education has 
been summoned as an ally in the struggle against ignorance and bigotry. 
Science in a thousand realms, the mechanic arts in all their varied de- 
partments have been laid under contribution to improve the estate of man. 

For Christianity, let it be impressed, is a highly practical as well as a 
profoundly spiritual mode of life. It loses nothing of its spiritual quality 
because of its practical helpfulness; but it touches all its practical work- 
ings with the spirit and purpose of lofty aspiration. Our confidence in 
it is justified by our knowledge of its accomplishment. Wherever it has 
been carried and made a force in the affairs of men it has wrought for 
their good. 


35 


But we must recognize also that it has added greatly to the complexity 
of human life and problems. Its encouragement to education, to knowl- 
edge, to scientific advancement, has created new forces in the world. 
The spirit of our organized, industrialized, machine-made and interre- 
lated world has touched men wherever they live and profundly affected 
their modes of life and thought. It has aroused in them new yearnings 
and new aspirations. It has truly converted this planet into a brotherhood 
of races and nationalities, interdependent in a thousand ways, tending 
more and more to develop a common culture, a common thought and 
purpose toward the great business of living. 

The problems which in this new order of life present themselves will 
not be solved except through a greater and constantly greater projection 
of the spirit of neighborship and co-operation, which is the true basis of 
the Christian code. 

So, as the Christian nations have assumed the responsibility for bring- 
ing this new and higher civilization in touch with all peoples, so they must 
recognize their responsibility to press on and on in their task of enlight- 
enment, education, spiritualization, Christianizing. There can be no 
hesitancy; no cessation of effort. 


President Coolidge, from his address before the Foreign Missions 
Convention, Washington, January 28, 1925. 


VIII—POLITICAL SOLUTIONS 


LEAGUE OF NATIONS 


One of the greatest gains which the Peace Conference has left is the 
League of Nations. This is an organization for the maintenance and de- 
velopment of peace, and therefore belongs to the very centre of the stage 
in the drama of which we have been watching the acts in this history. 
Now the League of Nations steps forward to play its part: what is it 
going to do? 

Let us see first how it came into existence, and what sort of an organ- 
ization it now has. It is probably common knowledge that at various 
crises in history the distress due to war led a few enlightened men to 
suggest that the Governments of Europe should form a League to avoid 
war. But all these plans had produced nothing when the Great War 
broke out. During the war, however, the utility of joint action was’ 
proved, for the Allies found that their Governments could buy food and 
munitions more cheaply if they had one buying organisation for all of 
them and afterwards divided what was bought, according to the need 
of the different nations. Before this joint buying had begun, England 
would be trying to buy in America the same food that France and Italy 
were also trying to buy; and the seller could therefore force the price 
up by offering it to the highest bidder. That stopped as soon as there 
was only one buyer for all the Allies, and their joint action was carried 
out by Councils of Ministers of the different Governments, assisted by 
an international secretariat... . 

The League is an organisation whose members are about fifty Govern- 
ments, not including, in 1923, the United States or Germany or Russia, 
but including all the other chief Governments, as well as the Govern- 
ments of the British Dominions and India. Among the fifty or more 
Governments, however, the majority have very little influence on the 
organisation of world peace. 

All the members of the League send representatives to an Annual 
Assembly at Geneva, where they discuss general questions of interest 
to all nations; but the Assembly has no power to do anything more than 
suggest action or make criticism public. Such power as is allowed to 
the League by the chief Governments is in the hands of the Council, 
which is a committee of eight persons representing the chief Govern- 
ments and a few of the smaller Governments. This Council meets every 
few months, and decides on action to be taken in the name of the League 
or receives reports of action already taken. The League is responsible 
for the administration of the Free City of Dantzig and the Saar Valley; 
and it is supposed to supervise the government of “mandated” terri- 
tories, the meaning of which will be explained later. Besides this, the . 
League has successfully undertaken several tasks in the organisation 
of peace. For example, it has restored to their homes about 300,000 
prisoners of war who were being kept by the Governments lately at war; 
it has checked the epidemic of typhus in Poland, which might easily have 
spread to the rest of the world; and it has restored the financial position 
of the Austrian Government. } 

A special section, the International Labour Organisation of the League, 
deals with international “labour” matters. The organisation consists of 
a General Conference of the members of the League, containing repre- 
‘sentatives not only of Governments, but also of employers and workers 
of the different nations, and a Governing Body, similar to and indepen- 
dent of the Council of the League, also including the three kinds of 
representatives. The General Conference discusses and votes on Con- 


37 


ventions or agreements between the governments for the improvement of 
“labour” conditions, such as the protection of women and children 
workers in industry, the shortening of the hours of labor, and so on. 

The League itself and its Labor Organization carry out their tasks 
through two secretariats, with offices in Geneva. The officials are of 
many different nations; but they all work together at the common ex- 
pense of the members of the League and for the common good of all 
nations. This, then, is a very striking advance in the organisation of 

eace. 

: In connection with the League, the Mandatory system, which is an 
arrangement whereby the colonies and dependencies of Germany and 
Turkey, taken by the Allied Governments during the war, are adminis- 
tered by some of the victorious Governments not as “possessions” but un- 
der the supervision of the League. ... The conferring of mandates was 
therefore, rather like making a present to oneself; but the theory was 
that these territories were not gains but “responsibilities.” In any case, 
it is a step forward in the organization of peace that powerful govern- 
ments should announce their intention of administering the territories 
of undeveloped peoples, for the good of those peoples and to the common 
advantage of all nations, rather than as “preserves” for themselves. The 
Council of the League is responsible for seeing that these good intentions 
are carried out; and we must wait for many years before we can tell 
whether a real advance has been made or the mandatory system is a mere 
cover for old methods. 

The work of the League is the organization of peace. It has already 
achieved something, but it has not been able to attack directly the growth 
of armaments and the other tendencies towards future war. In some 
ways the League itself could be improved; but it is undoubtedly one of 
the greatest steps forward in the history of peace, and, with all its 
defects, it could even now be used to increase peace and diminish wars, if 
the peoples of the world were really determined that it should be so 


used. 
C. Delisle Burns, “A Short History of International Intercourse.” — 


THE LEAGUE’S FIVE WAYS 


Courts are essential to the maintenance of peace and justice. But courts 
alone are inadequate for this purpose. There must also be legislation 
and administration. This is just as true with regard to international 
peace and justice as in the realm of municipalities and states. Therefore, 
not only is an international court needed, international legislation and in- 
ternational administration are also essential... . 

The real significance of the League, as has been pointed out by Mr. 
Arthur Sweetser, an American member of the Secretariat, is that 55 
nations—including all the major powers except the United States, Ger- | 
many and Russia—“have solemnly signed a short, simple, round-robin 
agreement, first not to go to war without arbitration or conciliation; 
ane second, to work together for the general betterment of world re- 
ations. 

There are five ways in which the League seeks to avoid war: (1) 
By referring disputes to conciliation or arbitration by a third party; (2) 
by providing for a delay in beginning hostilities, pending a recommenda- 
tion or decision; (3) by second and third attempts at arbitration when 
necessary; (4) by providing for an economic boycott against any nation 
which refuses to yield to the judgment of the arbitrator; (5) by resort- 
ing to common military action, as a last resort, against a recalcitrant 
nation. 

The League possesses six essential mechanisms for achieving its pur- 
poses: an Assembly, a Council, an International Court, an International 


38 


Labor Organization, various Committees and Commissions, and a per- 


manent Secretariat. 7 # 
Kirby Page, “War. 


THE WORLD COURT 


During the nineteenth century there was a steady tendency toward ar- 
bitration between nations. Professor John Bassett Moore has pointed 
out that of the 136 cases of arbitration in that century, 117 occurred during 
the latter half. Several wars were prevented in this way. The Hague 
Conferences of 1899 and 1907 made a significant contribution in this 
realm. The Hague Tribunal as established has, however, none of the 
essential elements of a world court. It is really only a panel of judges, 
from which arbitrators may be selected by two or more nations to settle 
a dispute, which has arisen. Since 1902 seventeen cases have been brought 
before it for decision. It has no permanent bench of judges. All attempts 
to give the Tribunal a permanent character have failed. 

At the end of the War it was generally recognized that a permanent 
world court was imperatively needed. The Covenant of the League of 
Nations provided for the establishment of such a court. The Council 
of the League invited a committee of eminent jurists, including Mr. 
Elihu Root from the United States, to aid in formulating plans for such 
a court. After several changes had been made this plan was adopted 
unanimously by the Assembly of the League on December 13, 1920. The 
protocol of the International Court has been ratified by thirty-one na- 
tions, including France, Great Britain, Italy and Japan, of the major 

owers. - 
; On September 16, 1921, eleven judges and four deputy judges were 
elected by a majority vote of the Assembly and the Council. 

At the present time the Court has a very limited jurisdiction. The 
recommendation of the committee of jurists—that in the last resort 
any nation should have the right to sue another nation for redress and 
compel appearance before the International Court—was not adopted. 
The Court is, therefore, competent to deal only with those cases where 
all parties to a dispute are willing to abide by its decisions. This is, 
ofcourse, a very grave weakness which must be corrected if the Court 
is to be effective in dealing with those cases which are the greatest menace 
to the peace of the world. Eighteen nations have, however, adhered to 
the clause of obligatory jurisdiction. Thus far only matters of rela- 
tively minor importance have been brought before the Court. Another 
great handicap is the absence of any well defined code of international 
aw. 

The International Court is the latest step in the long march from 
armed combat to reasoned agreement. It is a beginning, not an end. 
It has serious limitations and flaws which will wreck its usefulness if 
neglected. It can, however, be changed when the nations are so minded, 
and undoubtedly will be greatly modified during the next few years. 

Kirby Page, “War.” 


THE LOCARNO TREATIES 


On October 5, 1925 representatives of Great Britain, France, Belgium, 
Germany and Italy, and later of Czechoslovakia and Poland, met at Lo- 
carno, Italy, for the. purpose of drafting treaties which should provide 
guarantees against an attack of Germany upon France or an attack of 
France upon Germany. The resulting pacts, which have been ratified 
by the Powers concerned, are considered by many authorities to offer 
a better assurance of peace, so far as political action is concerned, than 
either the League of Nations or the World Court. 


3% 


There were seven treaties or conventions drawn up at Locarno to- 
gether with a formal statement explaining article 16 of the covenant of 
the League of Nations. The most important of the treaties is the treaty 
of Mutual Guarantee, commonly called “The Security Pact,” between 
Germany, Belgium, France, Great Britain and Italy. There were in 
addition four treaties of ar bitration between Germany on the one hand 
and Belgium, France, Poland and Czechoslovakia. There were in addition 
two treaties of security entered into by France with Poland and with 
Czechoslovakia. 

In the Security Pact, Germany, France and Belgium mutually agree 
not to attack or invade each other but to submit their differences to ar- 
bitration through a conciliation commission, or the machinery of the 
League of Nations, when they cannot be settled by diplomatic means. 
The treaty does not affect the territorial status of the present German, 
Belgian and French frontiers, which remain as fixed by the treaty of 
Versailles. Nor does it change the obligations of Germany under that 
treaty regarding the demilitarized zone on the Rhine. 

Great Britain and Italy are in the position of guarantors of the Treaty 
and it is expected that in the event of any dispute their power will be 
thrown against either of the other three that might be adjudged wrong. 
The Treaty does not impose any obligations upon any of the British 
dominions or India unless those states themselves accept the Treaty. 

The machinery of arbitration set up by the four arbitration treaties 
referred to involves a permanent Conciliation Commission to which the 
parties may take their differences before carrying the case to the World 
Court or some other Tribunal. Such arbitration is not to extend to dis- 
putes that were in existence before the conclusion of these treaties. 

The treaties between France and Poland and Czechoslovakia provide 
for reserving the rights of the signatory powers as members of the League 
of Nations in addition to a guarantee of mutual assistance in the event 
of Germany’s unprovoked resort to arms or in the case of an unprovoked 
attack upon either country which the Council of the League shall have 
failed to prevent. 

These treaties are founded on a basis which alone can make possible 
real progress between the countries of Europe; namely, that of mutual 
respect. They are based upon a cooperative spirit which is new among 
nations that have been traditional enemies. 


“Upright and happy we greet this great development for the peace of 
Europe. . . . We have undertaken to initial this treaty because we 
believe that only on the lines of friendly neighborliness can there be a 
real development of States and peoples which nowhere is more needed 
than among the cultural States of Europe, whose peoples have so in- 
cessantly suffered in the past.” 

Dr. Gustav Stresemann. 


“Tf we had here only made one or more treaties, and nothing more, 
our accomplishment would have been small. If that did not corre- 
spond to the new spirit, if it did not mark the beginning of an era of 
confidence and collaboration, it would never produce the big results we 
expect. From Locarno a new Europe must spring up. . . . Between 
our two countries there remains surface friction, there still are some sore 
points. This treaty must be salve for those sore spots. Our remaining 
difficulties must vanish.” 

M. Briand. 


It was an historic scene when representatives of the Great Powers, 
assembled in London on December 1, 1925, affixed their signatures to the 
Locarno Treaties. The treaties were signed in the Reception Room of 
the Foreign Office. “There was a leisurely tranquillity in the big Recep- 


40 


tion Room where the plenipotentiaries of seven nations were meeting 
to sign the Pact of Security and Peace. The Room is dignified in its 
proportions, grave, almost sombre in its general effect ...it.. 

suggests stately ceremonies and rigid etiquette. .. . In the center stood 
a big oblong table, with dispatch boxes, inkstands and pens upon it, and 
surrounded with heavy chairs. Other smaller tables for secretaries stood 
near and rows of drawing room chairs were ranged along the walls. 
Behind a barrier of journalists from the world were wedged in tiers, 
and photographers and cinematographers were perched high up in nooks 
above the windows. . .. At 11, Sir Austen Chamberlain appeared 
smiling in the doorway leading the signatories in—18 were the chosen 
company of European men of State who were to carry out a solemn act, 


on which the fortunes of millions depend.” 
London Times, Dec. 2, 1925. 





OUTLAWRY OF WAR 


An important school of thinkers are urging as the political measure of 
first importatice the enactment of legislation on the part of the nations, 
whereby war, instead of being recognized as a legal method of settling 
disputes, shall be declared an international crime, to be passed upon by 
an appropriate tribunal and dealt with as the cooperating nations may 
decide. A plan for the “Outlawry of War” (from the standpoint of 
the United States) is here outlined from an article by Mr. S. O. Levinson. 


1. Declaration of our international policy by the passage of the United 
States Senate of the Borah resolution to outlaw war; to be followed 
by similar parliamentary declarations in other countries. 

2. When a substantial number of parliaments have so responded, Con- 
ference of all civilized nations to be called to execute a general 
treaty for the abolition and outlawing of war. 

3. This Conference to call a Convention for the creation and codifi- 
cation of the international laws of peace at which all civilized nations 
shall have adequate representation; such code to contain, among 
other things, articles based upon the following principles, with 
which no other articles of the code shall be in conflict: 

(a) Further use of war as an institution for the settlement of in- 
ternational disputes shall be abolished. 

(b) War between nations shall be declared to be a public crime 
under the law of nations, but the right of defense against actual 
invasions shall not be impaired. 

(c) All annexations, seizures, or exactions by force, duress or 
fraud, shall be null and void. 

(d) The international laws of peace shall be based upon equality 
and justice between nations, and shall be expanded, adapted, 
and brought down to date from time to time by similar Con- 
ventions. 

(e) A judicial substitute for war as the method of settling inter- 
national disputes shall be created (or if existing in part, adapt- 
ed and adjusted, in the nature of an international court modeled 
on our Federal Supreme Court in its jurisdiction over con- 
troversies between our sovereign states); such court to pos- 
sess affirmative jurisdiction to hear and decide all international 
controversies, as defined by the code, or arising under treaties. 

(f) The court shall have jurisdiction over all parties to a dispute 
upon the petition of any party to the dispute, or of any sig- 
natory nation. 

(g) All nations shall agree to abide and be bound by and in good 
faith to carry out the orders, judgments, decrees, and decisions 
of such court. 

41 


(h) ‘The jurisdiction of the court shall not extend to matters of 
governmental, domestic, or protective policy, unless one of the 
disputing parties has by treaty or otherwise given another 
country a claim that involves these subjects. The classes of 
disputes excluded from the jurisdiction of the international 
court shall be specifically enumerated in the code and not be 
left open to the flexible and dangerous distinction between 
justiciable and non-justiciable controversies, including ques- 
tions of national honor. ; : 4 

(i) All petitions, answers, and other pleadings, shall be in writing 
and accessible to the public, and all hearings by the court shall 
be open. 

(j) The court should sit in the hemisphere of the contending na- 
tions; and if the disputants live in opposite hemispheres, then 

‘in the hemisphere of the defendant nation. 

(k) National armaments to be reduced to the lowest point con- 
sistent with domestic safety and reasonable international re- 
quirements. 

(1) All nations shall make public report once each year, setting 
forth fully their armaments, old and new, military and naval, 
structural and chemical. These reports to be verified by au- 
thorized committees acting under the direction and jurisdiction 
of the international court. 

4. After the code has been created, it shall be submitted to a plebiscite 
or referendum in each civilized nation, so that the faith of the 
peoples of all countries shall be pledged behind the code. 

5. War must be outlawed before the international court is given af- 
firmative jurisdiction over the disputes of the nations, just as the 
power to engage in war among our states was, under Article I, 
Section 9 of our Constitution, given up by our states before they 
clothed the Supreme Court with jurisdiction over their disputes. 

6. Every nation should by agreement or treaty bind itself to indict 
and punish its own international war breeders or instigators and 
war profiteers under powers similar to those conferred upon our 
Congress under Article I, Section 8, of our Federal Constitution, 
which clothes Congress with the power “to define and punish of- 
fenders against the law of nations”. Provisions for adequate legis- 
lation to this end should be made. 

7. Pending the formation of the code and the other details that will 
consume considerable time, a modus vivendi to be agreed upon by 
the nations covering the géneral principles contained in the fore- 
going plan. 


THE LEAGUE AND THE GOLDEN RULE 


The spirit that underlies the preamble [of the League of Nations] 
and all these articles is that which inspired the commandment, “Ye 
should do unto others as ye would they should do unto you,” and if it 
be given effect to, and the articles quoted above be loyally and earnestly 
put into operation, the Covenant of the League may become the golden 
rule of international Christian Brotherhood. Thereby, civilization, which 
at this moment appears to be on the brink of disaster, may yet save itself 
by a bold application of Christianity. Will the nations who constitute 
the League, and who believe in a reign of law, recognise that love is 
the fulfilling of the law? If they fail to grasp this great Christian truth 
they will fail in everything. The basis of the League must be love, and 
if it rests on any other foundation, then, though it speak with the tongues 
of men or of angels, it will become but as sounding brass or a tinkling 
cymbal. . 

42 


But it is not sufficient to appeal to Governments. Governments are 
only what their people make them, and the fate of the League really 
rests with the people. It is, therefore, the nations themselves who must 
be made to understand the usefulness of the League, its functions and 
its possibilities. It is they who must learn that it is righteousness that 
exalteth a nation, and that a League of Nations can only prosper if it is 
based on justice, on tolerance and on love. It should be the special duty 
of the Christian Churches to inculcate this lesson, for by it alone they 
can hope to lead mankind into the path of peace. 

And, above all, if the League of Nations is to become, as it might 
become, the embodiment of the Christian ideal of universal brotherhood, 
it will need all that the Churches can offer in the way of work and 
prayer. The League, as yet, is but an instrument of human construction ; 
but if used by men with honest purpose and high motives it will surely 
gain the Divine favour which alone will enable it to regenerate mankind. 

C. O. P. E. C. “International Relations,’ Commission Report.” 


A HIGHLY COMPLEX PROBLEM 


The line which separates faithful witness to Christian principle from 
advocacy of a particular political programme is often difficult to find. 
To reach a sound judgment in complex and intricate questions of politi- 
cal and economic relations demands the wide knowledge and trained in- 
telligence. It would be easy for missionary bodies to commit themselves 
to courses of action which would merit Burke’s censure on those who 
turn aside from their proper business of religion to interfere in politics— 
“Wholly unacquainted. with the world in which they are so fond of med- 
dling, and inexperienced in all its affairs, on which they pronounce with 
so much confidence, they know nothing of politics but the passions they 
excite.’ But the recognition of these difficulties does not mean that the 
task should be avoided but that it must be approached with the necessary 
caution, knowledge and wisdom. If missionary bodies fail to enter thei~ 
protest where it is needed against the unchristian elements in western 
nationalism their Christian witness is to that extent impaired. We 
cannot preach convincingly in word what we deny in national act and 
policy. In the ultimate mutual relations of different peoples in our 
complex modern world the range of missionary duty has expanded until 
it includes not only the winning of individual souls but the endeavor 
to Christianize the national policies of the professedly Christian nations, 
and the former part of the task will be handicapped if the latter is 
ignored. 

J. H. Oldham, “International Review of Missions,’ 1920. 


THE GOLDEN RULE AND THE STATE 


The Golden Rule is not wholly a negative thing. It sometimes demands 
interference in defense of the oppressed. Some years ago a group of 
university professors returning home from an evening engagement heard 
shouts of pain and distress issuing from a cottage that they were passing. 
Hesitating but a moment as to their duty, they entered the house and 
found that in a quarrel between a father and son, one or both of them 
intoxicated, one had stabbed the other dangerously. A part of them 
remained to prevent further injuries, while the rest sought physician and 
police. Ordinarily a man’s house is his castle, which no one may enter 
unbidden, but there are limitations to the rule—the intervention of a 
superior principle. So it is with nations. There come times when one 
nation must protest against injustice done or threatened against another, 
and must, if need be, sustain its protest. 


43 


This brings us to the difficult question whether, if one nation may on 
occasion become the friend and defender of another, it may also at 
times become its guardian, guide, and protector... . The question is 
too large to be discussed adequately in these pages. I will only venture 
to lay down two principles. ; Sieh: 

One of these is that the right of self-government is not inalienable. 
Individuals may lose it by crime or by illness of body or brain. Families 
may lose it by incompetence, and the neighbors or the state be obliged 
to step in. Cities may lose it by riot and murder. States may lose it 
by the incompetence by which they become dangerous to themselves 
and to other nations. Palestine lost it in 63 B.C., and there is more 
than one utterance of Jesus to show that he clearly recognized this fact 
and warned his nation against the folly of attempting to cure internal 
weakness by throwing off the external power that sufficed in some meas- 
ure to compensate for that weakness... . 

The second principle is that any nation that assumes the office of 
guardian to another is bound to do it in the spirit of the Golden Rule, 
not for exploitation and self-aggrandizement, but for the good of the 
other nation and of other nations at least as much as for its own. It 
is bound scrupulously to regard the rights of the dependent nation and 
is under solemn obligation to administer its guardianship with a view to 
restoring the guarded nation to independence or granting it partnership 
as soon as a process of education can make it fit for such a position... . 

Is the Golden Rule workable between nations? With confidence I af- 
firm it is both more needful and more workable between nations than 
between individuals. More needful because the harm done when nations 
do not follow it is upon a far vaster scale than when individuals violate 
it. Its disregard by individuals may have far-reaching consequences. 
But when nations set it at naught, the issues are certain to be far- 
reaching and wide-sweeping, involving not hundreds but thousands and 
millions in the stream of devastation. Now that the world has become 
so small, now that nations touch elbows as once tribes and individuals 
did, now that they call to each other out of their windows across a 
narrow stream that electricity bridges in an instant, and jostle one another 
in the public highways of the world, the only salvation of the world from 
measureless disaster is the observance of the Golden Rule between nations. 
And it is more practicable between nations than between individuals 
because nations act—ought to act and usually do act—with more de- 
liberation, less under the influence of sudden passion than individuals. 
Their relations are defined in compacts which they have solemnly bound 
themselves not to break, and not hastily to annul. There is time for 
sober second thought, time for the best thought of the nation to be 
brought to bear on the situation. There is no excuse for haste. But 
we must train ourselves to think and deliberate, and especially must 
train ourselves and our nation to recognize that the Golden Rule is the 
supreme law of nations—pre-eminently adapted to nations, its obedience 
indispensable to their welfare and the safety of the world. The Golden 
Rule is—it is the only rule that is—workable between nations. 


Ernest DeWitt Burton. 
THE ALTERNATIVE OF INTERNATIONAL GOOD-WILL 


Are we, then, to assume that national good-will, being exceedingly dif- 
ficult to apply, would better not be attempted at all? Are we to follow 
the advice of Lord Melbourne to a young official—‘You’d better try to 
do no good, and then you’ll get into no scrapes.” The history of the on- 
ward march of the altruistic principle is a sufficient reply. Having 
achieved the conception of trusteeship on the part of colonial powers, the 
International Red Cross, the League of Nations, and the World Court, 


44 


the world will continue to move in the same direction. A beginning has 
been made. It remains to press on to perfection. In the opinion not 
only of idealistic reformers but of an increasing number of practical 
statesmen, the progress of the race depends upon the application of 
Christian ideals to international relations. Many are saying, “This is the 
next great step in the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven.” 

That the problem is one of vast difficulty, that it calls for leadership 
of the highest quality, is true of course. But what of that? What is 
statesmanship, especially of the Christian sort, for if it cannot grapple 
with the problems of the actual world? Burke, Wilberforce, Gladstone, 
Franklin, Lincoln, Hay are our best assurance today. Our task is not 
more difficult than was theirs. We have encouragements which they 
did not possess. Behind us is the momentum of noble achievement. 

Of one thing we may be perfectly sure. If the problem of an altru- 
istic world is great, the problem of an unaltruistic world is even greater. 
Such a world, indeed, is an impossibility. We must either press on to 
a world where peace and ordered justice prevail or revert to essential 
barbarism. It is either the Golden Rule, or the rule of Rob Roy, 

“That they shall take who have the power 
And they shall keep who can.” 
Cornelius H. Patton, in an address. 


NATIONS LEARNING BY EXPERIENCE 


The lesson of European history is so plain. It is that no enduring 
security can be found in competing armaments and in separate alliances ; 
there is no security for any Power unless it be a security in which its 
neighbors have an equal share. All this, it may be objected, is so obvious 
as to be commonplace—something of which nations must all have been 
aware for many generations, though they have not acted on it. The fact 
that, though possessing this knowledge, they have not hitherto acted 
upon it, is represented as proof that they cannot and will never do so. 
We are therefore invited to discard such reflections as are made in this 
chapter as being counsels of perfection, which could be of no use in 
practical politics. 

This line of argument is, in effect, based on the assumption that nations 
are incapable of learning by experience. There is much in history that 
supports this view, but the tendency to pessimistic acceptance of it is 
checked by the reflection that man has, -in fact, ascended from savagery 
to civilization, and that this ascent has been possible only because men, 
individually and collectively, have been capable of learning by experience. 
The Great War has been the most tremendous experience in the history 
of civilized man, and the assumption that he has learned nothing from it 
except to prepare for and to make another war is unreasonable. It is not 
in accord with his past progress. It can only be true if he has ceased 
to learn, and, if that be sq he will not only cease to progress, but will 
dwindle and decay; for he cannot be stationary. 

Viscount Grey, “Twenty-Five Years,’ (1892-1916), Chap. XXXII. 


CHANGED CONDITIONS 


To-day civilized man is confronted by immensely changed conditions. 
They are due in the main, to his own discoveries in the region of science. 
In the last hundred years he has eaten more fruit of the Tree of Knowl- 
edge than any previous generation of which there is record. He has 
acquired unprecedented power over the processes of nature. He can 
move by air, land, or water with hitherto unheard-of speed. He has 
facilities for incessant communication that heretofore have been unknown. 
Whether he will control the use of all these things so as to make them 


45 


serve and not injure his physical and mental capacity and welfare is 
a speculation that goes beyond political enquiry. “Knowledge comes, 
but wisdom lingers,’ wrote Tennyson, at a time when thought was be- 
ing enlarged and exhilarated by the discoveries of science. In one re- 
spect, however, these discoveries confront man with a definite political 
problem. “War” is the same word as it was a century ago, but it is 
no longer the same thing. It used to imply a contest between armies ; 
it will henceforth, by common consent, mean the destruction by chemical 
agencies, of the crowded centres of population; it will mean physical, 
moral, and economic ruin. It is necessary therefore that, by common 


consent, war should be avoided. 
Viscount Grey, “Twenty-Five Years,’ (1892-1916), Chap. XXX, 


LEARN OR PERISH 


The most effective change would be that nations should dislike each 
other a little less, and like each other a little more; but this aspect takes 
us into regions of moral or religious speculation. Nations cannot help 
disliking what they do not understand. Yet it should be possible for 
them, after the last war, to find at least one common ground on which 
they should come together in confident understanding: an agreement 
that, in disputes between them, war must be ruled out as a means of 
settlement that entails ruin; that between nations, as between individuals, 
the risk involved in settlement by law or arbitration is preferable to the 
disaster of force. ‘Learn, or perish’ is the rule for nations as for indi- 
viduals: by evident necessity, though the justice of it may seem in- 
scrutable, one nation or one individual cannot be saved by separate virtue. 
A wise individual cannot escape being involved in misfortunes due to 
the unwisdom of his countrymen; one nation may learn, but may yet be 
involved in the misfortunes of a Continent that does not learn. . 

The future, the life of European civilization, will depend upon whether 
a wiser and more instructed spirit prevails now than it did before the 
experience of the Great War; if it does not, our present civilization will 
perish, as others have done before it, and the future progress of mankind 
will depend on the rise of something new, some human agency outside 
Europe and perhaps not of European race. If, however, such a spirit 
does exist, then some things that have hitherto been unattainable aspira- 
tions may, and indeed will be, accomplished. 

Viscount Grey, “Twenty-Five Years (1892-1916), Chap. XXXI. 


THE SUPREME NEED OF CIVILIZATION 


Rightly considered, this will not lead to the conclusion that under no 
circumstances are nations to use force. The internal peace of every 
country depends upon the knowledge that force is available to uphold law. 
The greater the consensus of opinion in any country that force should be 
used for this purpose, the less occasion there will be for the use of force, 
and the more settled and sure will be the internal peace of that country. 
So it is with the community of nations. Only a general consensus of 
opinion not to be lawless, and to prevent any nation from being lawless, 
will ensure world peace. No great country will contribute anything to 
that peace by saying that there is no principle whatever for which it 
will stand up, if need be, by the use of force. 

There will be no secure peace till the Great Nations of the world have 
a consensus of opinion among them sufficient to inspire confidence that 
they will stand by each other to avoid, to suppress, or to localize and 
insulate war. 

The public mind is much exercised by a desire to restrict armaments. 
It seems to be understanding that competition in armaments does not 


46 


lead to security. The next stage is for it to realize that only a sense 
of security will prevent growth of armaments. When this stage is 
reached, the public will be unmistakably face to face with the problem 
of how to produce this essential feeling of security. To solve this problem 
will require the concentrated effort of all the Great Nations in concert, 
and if this is to be forthcoming, it will be necessary for them to under- 
stand that the solution of this problem is the supreme need of civilized 


mankind. 
Viscount Grey, “Twenty-Five Years (1892-1916), Chap. XXXI. 


CHRIST OF THE ANDES 


The two nations (Argentine and Chile) were ready to go to war over 
a boundary line. Millions of dollars were being spent in preparation. 
Feeling was running high. Just then the British Ministers to Argentine 
and Chile, supported by the bishops of the two countries, said to the 
two governments: “How much better it would be instead of going into 
a long and cruel war over this question, and wasting all your money 
and thousands of lives, if you would ask an impartial group of men from 
other nations to examine into the case and decide it. War will not de- 
termine who is right—only who is strongest.” 

The two nations were persuaded, the case was arbitrated by a board 
of jurists appointed by King Edward of England and the decision was 
perfectly satisfactory to both nations. The two nations, seeing how 
much better the way of law was than the way of war, immediately con- 
cluded a treaty in which they agreed to submit all controversies arising 
between them to arbitration. 

In celebration of the happy outcome of the arbitration and of the 
signing of the new treaty, cue of the most remarkable statues ever made 
was placed in one of the most unique places—namely, high up in the 
Andes, on the road from one country to another. The statue was car- 
ried by rail in huge crates from Buenos Ayres to Mendoza, then on 
gun-carriages up the mountains, the soldiers and sailors themselves 
taking the ropes in critical places, where there was danger of the mules 
stumbling. Hundreds of persons had come up the night before and 
encamped on the ground, to be present at the ceremony. The Argentines 
ranged. themselves on the soil of Chile and the Chileans on the Argentine 
side. There was music and the booming of guns, whose echoes re- 
sounded through the mountains. The moment of unveiling after the 
parts had been placed in position, was one of solemn silence. The statue 
was then dedicated to the whole world as a practical lesson of peace and 
good will. The ceremonies of the day (Third Month 13, 1904) were 
closed, as the sun went down, with a prayer that love and kindness might 
penetrate the hearts of men everywhere. 

The base of the statue is granite. On this is a granite sphere, weighing 
some fourteen tons, on which the outlines of the world are sketched, 
resting upon a granite column twenty-two feet high. The figure of the 
Christ above in bronze, is twenty-six feet in height. The cross supported 
in his left hand is five feet higher. The right hand is stretched out in 
blessing. On the granite base are two bronze tablets, one of them given 
by the Workingmen’s Union of Buenos Ayres, the other by the working 
women. One of them gives the record of the creation and erection of 
the statue; on the other are inscribed the words: “Sooner shall these 
mountains crumble into dust than Argentines and Chileans break the 
peace to which they have pledged themselves at the feet of Christ the 
Redeemer.” In this way the spirit of peace and good will rests among 


the mountains. 
Frederick Lynch, “The Christ of the Andes.” 
47 


IX+SUPREMACY OF MORAL FORCES 


THE FINAL FORCES 


The ultimate forces which control civilization are not material but 
spiritual. If they are righteous, strong, commanding, the future is 
secure. If they are false or weak, our civilization will go to smash. It 
went to smash in Central Europe ten years ago. Not because men did 
not know enough about chemistry and mechanics. They knew too much, 
Not because they lacked wealth, or organization, or business sagacity, 
or culture. . . . Because men’s hearts were filled with greed, hatred, 
pride, fear and the ambition for power and glory the crash came. | 

The decisive battles are fought not on land or sea, nor in the air, but 
in the minds of men. - Unless we can cast out these evil spirits and make 
dominant the ideals of justice, brotherhood and good-will another crash 
will come, on an even greater scale, and with even greater horrors and 
miseries than those so vivid in our memories. No international leagues 
or political devices will avail. A new spirit must rule men’s minds or 
our civilization will perish in blood and fire. 

Rev. Edward M. Noyes. 


THE SENSIBLE MDEATTS# 


When I speak of Idealism I mean not that blind faith in the certainty 
of human progress which was engendered fifty years ago by the tri- 
umphs of applied science and the prosperity they brought, but rather that 
aspiration for a world more enlightened and more happy than that which 
we see today, a world in which the cooperation of men and nations rather 
than their rivalry and the aggrandizement of one at the expense of the 
other, shall be guiding aims. Good-will sweetens life; nobody is so 
happy as he who rejoices in the happiness of others. Hatred has never 
brought anything but evil. The sensible idealist—and he is not the less 
an idealist, and a far more useful one, if he is sensible, and sees the world 
as it is—is not a visionary, but a man who feels that the forces making 
for good may and probably will tend to prevail against those making 
for evil, but will prevail only if the idealists join in a constant effort to 
make them prevail. The greatest of Roman poets has compared the 
cultivator of the soil who must ceaselessly struggle against the obstacles 
which storms and droughts and noxious insects create to his raising 
crops from it, to a man who rows his boat up a swift river and will be 
swept downstream if he relaxes for a moment his efforts to make way 
against the current. So it is only by constant exertions and by quenchless 
hopes that those human relations, those moral things which are the most 
important for happiness, can be made to move forward against the forces 
that resist them. The oars must never be allowed to drop for a moment 
from the rower’s hands, nor his muscles to relax their strain. 

James Bryce, “International Reiations,” 


ONE AVENUE TO PEACE 


Secretary Hughes, in the course of his famous speech, May 15, 1923, 
which, whether intentionally or not, cut the ground from under “Defense 
Day,” said, “There is only one avenue to peace. That is in the settlement 
of actual differences and the removal of ill will. All else is talk, form, 
and pretense.” After speaking of the settlement of differences through 
“institutions of justice,” he went on as follows: “Between friends any 


48 


difficulty can be settled. There is no substitute for goodwill. There is 
no mechanism of intercourse that can dispense with it.” 
Frederick J. Libby, “What Price Peace?” 


WHAT WILLIAM PENN DEMONSTRATED 


The experiment of William Penn is of real interest. The following 
are the words of Benjamin F. Trueblood: 


It was a “holy experiment” because it was founded in love, built upon 
the principles which love dictates, and carried forward in the faith which 
is inspired and sustained by love... . Not only is William Penn’s 
history incomparably clear, but it is also clearly unlike any other piece 
of human history. In its grasp of the principles of liberty, equality and 
brotherhood, and of the secret of their successful establishment among 
men, and particularly in its heroic application of these principles and of 
this sectet in the constitution and government of a Commonwealth, it 
stands apart, an absolutely unique chapter in the history of men and of 
States. . 

His purpose in buying of the king lands here in America and in pre- 
paring a charter for the government of the colony which he was pro- 
posing to plant was that he might establish a Christian State, based from 
the start on Christian principles, created and directed in the spirit of 
Christian love, a State in which the governing and the governed might 
realize together the blessings of the brotherhood taught by Jesus Christ. 
. . The peace experiment was successful for seventy years, though a 
considerable part of the colony always opposed it and clamored for arms. 
Seventy years of peace in the turbulent atmosphere of that time meant 
much more than it would mean now, and is as near a demonstration as 
anything short of actual trial could be that the same thing might be 
done again by any State or nation whose people were convinced that it 
ought to be done, and which had the courage to try it... . 

he Gentleman’s Magazine for October, 1902, contains a detailed de- 
scription by E. E. Taylor of . . . Penn’s experiment: ... 

From 1701 to 1719 there was little unsettlement with the Indians. It 
is clear that the whole government of Penn considered it their emphatic 
interest‘to maintain warm friendship with the Indians. . 

The history of Penn’s relations with the Indians is not complete with- 
out a reference to the estimation in which they held him personally. This 
is, of course, most eloquently shown by the seventy-four years of active 
friendship existing between the two peoples. Indeed, this period may be 
definitely prolonged if the Quakers only are concerned; for it is a strik- 
ing fact that when a state of war at last existed between the Indians 
and the colony, no true Quaker was disturbed. If a so-called Quaker 
took to a gun, why, then, the Indians treated him as an enemy, knowing 
“that the Quakers would not fight nor do them any harm.” 


Penn’s high policy of basing his relations with the native tribes of 
North America upon the natural rights of all mankind—not upon the 
supposed interests of trade—is thus shown, by a contemplation of its 
fruits, to have been amply justified. For the times it was a bold and 
original attempt; its final success is honorable to him who conceived the 
project, and is pregnant with lessons for the present generation. 


D. Willard Lyon, “The Christian Equivalent of War.” 


49 


X.-CHRISTIANITY AND WORLD PEACE 


CHRISTIANITY AND INTERNATIONALISM 


Christianity and Internationalism are one and the same. Internation- 
alism is essentially Christian, in origin and spirit and cardinal tenets. 
Christianity is essentially international, in character and faith. One can- 
not be a true Chrstian and not be a true internationalist. Christianity 
stands, the first great movement in history, the only great movement in 
religion, the founder of which left as his great commission to his fol- 
lowers a command to go to “all nations,’ and as the goal of their efforts 
a kingdom the citizens of which shall be a “great multitude which no man 
can number, out of every kindred and tribe and nation and tongue,” 
living together as one great family, working out their common life in 
freedom and in peace, a world kept one by the free spirit of man and 
the Holy Spirit of God. 

Internationalism has been, through all the history of the church, a 
part of its vital spirit. With all its faults, despite its piteous weaknesses 
and its heinous sins, the Christian Church has acted as a force to draw 
men together, to make them conscious of a real unity transcending their 
external differences, to make them dissatisfied with a divided world, 
restless until there is among the severed parts of humanity an at-one- 
ment, a reconciliation. 

Moreover the missionary enterprise has reacted vigorously upon the 
international movement. For missions find themselves hampered at 
every step by selfish aggrandizement at the expense of the weak and 
backward races to which the church ministers through its missionary 
enterprise. Next to the baleful influence of the evil individual who mis- 
represents Christianity in the sight of the Orient, the missionary enter- 
prise suffers most from the influence of the immoral conduct of so- 
called Christian nations. Nothing could give so powerful an impetus 
to missions as could a righteous solution of the relation between East 
and West, between the Great Powers and the great needy races, an in- 
ternational order that shall “set judgment in the earth.” 


William Pierson Merrill, “Christian Internationalism.” 


THE CHURCH AND INTERNATIONALISM 


From the nature of Christianity the Christian Church becomes an 
international institution. Her field is the world. You never see the 
Church at her best unless she is playing a part on a stage as wide as 
the planet. She never gives indubitable evidence of her Divine origin 
until she sets to work at an immeasurable and impossible task. When 
you see her working in a limited field, petty in spirit and narrow in aim, 
pottering about things which are paltry, you wonder if this is the in- 
stitution which was to come, or whether the world had better look for 
another. But when you see her laying her hands on the brows of nations, 
pouring fresh vigor into the veins of empires that were old when Jesus 
died on the cross, laying hold of backward and friendless races and 
planting their feet on the steep and difficult ascent up which the leaders 
of humanity are making their way, there is borne in upon you the con- 
viction that this is none other than the servant of the Most High God, 
and that her commission was written in heaven. 


Rev. Charles E. Jefferson, D.D., “Missions and International Peace.” 


CHRISTIANITY A WORLD RELIGION 


I am not a Christian, but I do not hesitate to call your religion the 
world religion, not a national or state religion. . . . In order to have 


50 


world perpetual peace we must have the unity of moral and religious 
sentiment among the whole people of the earth; there must grow up one 
international mind, and the Christian religion has succeeded in attaining 
that for the first time in the history of the world. 
Baron Sakatani, “Missionary Ammunition,’ No. Ten. 
Printed by Committee of Reference and Counsel. 


INTERNATIONAL FELLOWSHIP 


On the fall of the Roman Empire the Christian Church took its place 
as the governing influence in the life of Europe. . . . The general 
tendency of the Christian message was unmistakable. It stood for uni- 
versalism. The Fatherhood of God involved the Brotherhood of Man. 
The narrow nationalism of the Jews, with their arrogant doctrine of a 
Chosen People, could find no place in a movement where Jew and Gen- 
tile, bond and free, met on equal terms as children of a common Father. 
Distinctions of race and language and class faded into insignificance 
compared with the spiritual bond of Christian fellowship. 


C.O. P. E. C. “International Relations,’ Commission Report, Vol. VII. 


DEFECT OF PROTESTANTISM 


The Christian: Church is not, yet entirely Christian. We have frankly 
to recognize that no section of it has completely appropriated the Christian 
ideal either of faith or of practice. The Protestant churches in particular 
have been deficient in that they have failed to apply the democratic ideal 
internationally and inter-racially with any marked enthusiasm. But the 
fact remains that the Christian Church does possess the ideal, and if all 
the world had reached the level of moral attainment already achieved by 
the Church a real Commonwealth of the States of the World could be 
inaugurated tomorrow. Of no other institution or organization may this 
claim be made. The Christian Church is unique. Is it not clear, then, 
that the greatest asset which the world today possesses for making 
effective the League of Nations, for keeping it from degenerating into 
another Holy Alliance, for constantly lifting the moral average of its 
constituent parts, and for preparing the nations and races not now 
included for membership, is the spirit of Christianity, and the organization 
of the Church? 

Tyler Dennett, “A Better World.” 


ONCE A CHRISTIAN PEACE .- 


“The minds of men were prepared at that time (the fourteenth century) 
for peace to include at any rate all Christian nations. The common 
language of the learned, the common religion and the generally accepted 
view of life in all countries, had brought about everywhere a feeling of 
unity among Christian peoples. This was not simply the feeling of 
a select few; it was common among folk who could neither read nor 
write, as we can still see in the decoration of the great cathedrals— 
Chartres and Amiens, Wells and Salisbury. On the west fronts of these 
are the tiers of statues which represent the whole of human history as 
the Middle Ages understood it. There are first Adam and Eve, parents 
of all men, and the heroes of the Old Testament, then Apostles and 
Doctors of the Church, with Roman Emperors; then the great kings and 


St 


bishops of Christendom; and then the end of all things, the last judg- 
ment and heaven and hell. In that story distinctions between Christian 
peoples were irrelevant and warriors of no account. Humanity was one 
family, whose greatest members were the Saints. That same history of 
peace was read in the stones of their churches by the people of every 
country in Europe.” 

C. Delisle Burns, “A Short History of International Intercourse.” 


LET THE CHURCH LEAD 


Unquestionably, the church should lead in such a program. This is 
a “fundamental doctrine’ common to all creeds and branches of the 
Christian Church and its propagation would constitute a common task 
in which their forces might be united to the advantage of the church 
itself. Furthermore, the church is an educational agency and as such 
is operating in every nation of the globe, among all classes and races. 
It pioneered in the establishment of educational institutions in this coun- 
try and is now doing the same thing in other lands. Not only has the 
Christian missionary opened schools where there were none, he has 
created a written language where none had existed and produced litera- 
ture for peoples that had never known of the existence of books. In 
other countries, where learning was restricted to a privileged few, the 
missionary has extended its blessings to coolie and sweeper, making 
high caste of outcasts, sons of God out of “vocal tools.” 

Evelyn Riley Nicholson, “The Way to a Warless World.” 


EXAMPLES OF INTERNATIONAL FELLOWSHIP 


Already we are getting rich foretastes of international Christian fel- 
lowship. For example, in 1923, at Oxford, men and women came to- 
gether for the International Missionary Council from India and China, 
from Western and Northern Europe, and from North and South America. 
Here was a body, representing a wide range of nations and races, in- 
cluding many types of experience, and manifesting great variety of 
outlook; and yet knit together because of fellowship in a great objective. 
For ten days they met together in discussion and prayer over questions 
so inescapable, so challenging, so vast, as to demand nothing less than 
corporate faith and action. During periods of discussion, devotion and 
social relaxation many felt exhilarated in experiencing the rich and 
varied contributions made by a group so constituted. 

Not less was this true in the World’s Christian Student Federation 
at its eleventh conference, in Peking, in 1922. Here were Koreans, 
Japanese, Czecho-Slovakians, Dutch, and Scandinavians, Italians, Greeks, 
Negroes, Indians, British, and Americans. Chinese had the largest hand 
in the organization. Indians came with a new vision of Christ gained 
from the vindication of spiritual force as seen in their national leader, 
Mahatma Gandhi. Their faith in God stood out, for when the con- 
ference was in the depths of argument and discussion—overburdened 
by their responsibility for reconstructing the world—it was the Indians 
who gently but firmly reminded the delegates that God’s hand was at 
the helm. Some Orientals thought that they might be able to take certain 
practical things better from the Chinese than from the Westerners; some 
Chinese thought that they might get the mystical elements in religion 
better from Christian India than from Britain or America. More than 
one delegate caught the consciousness that his nation has something that 
is characteristic, and is good, and which other peoples need. 

As it became plain that no widespread advance could be made until 
Christians in all lands joined in the common fight against wrong, all 


Se 


saw that the non-Christian elements in the West need the Christian East 
no less than the non-Christian elements in the East need the Christian 
West. Only together will the Kingdom of God be built. 

Still another example is found in the action of the executive com- 
mittee of the National Christian Council of Japan in connection with 
the United States Immigration Act of 1924. Feeling that International 
amenities had not been duly considered, that adequate opportunity for 
united conference had been denied, and that the act as passed was not in 
accord with the spirit of Christianity, this Council expressed to the 
Federal Council of Churches in America its desire “to cooperate with 
the Christians in the United States with a view to solving satisfactorily 
this difficult racial question in the spirit essential to Christianity.” Evi- 
dently we are just at the beginning of a period of such interchange of 
judgments on an international scale. 

Daniel Johnson Fleming, “Whither Bound in Missions.” 


AN ACT OF FAITH | , 


After examining all the evidence, the teaching of history, the nature 
and results of modern war, it finally comes down to an act of faith. A 
man believes, at the last, that either force or moral suasion is more 
effective in a given situation; either material or spiritual means will best 
work; either Jesus’ way of life is practical or it is not. Faith is the giv- 
ing of substance, or the proving in final experience, of things still hoped 
for and unseen. And peace is of such stuff as dreams are made of. 
Yet it must be made as solid and substantial as freedom, that was once 
but a dream under slavery and the tyrannies of the past. The same un- 
daunted faith that challenged and assailed other age-long evils now 
throws down the gauntlet to war. Though it were as old as time, ar- 
mored with its vested interests as was slavery, backed by the might of 
all the armies and governments on earth, though it be blessed by pulpits. 
advocated by the propaganda of publicists and politicians, we challenge 
here and now this Goliath of war. Joyfully we will cast in our lot with 
Jesus and his way of life and stake our lives upon his way of love 
and moral suasion. 

In finally accepting his way of life for all things and for all time, I 
have found stable moral equilibrium. For the rest, I believe his princi- 
ples will work, in so far as we honestly apply them, as well in our lives 
as in his. He is what I mean by success, and his cross is what I mean 
DVAVICLOLYE a, 

Did Jesus place political freedom above all other values? The answer 
is clear and incontrovertible. Jesus lived as a citizen of a country that 
was in bondage to militaristic Rome. His countrymen deeply resented 
their captivity and were eagerly awaiting the coming of the Messiah, 
the son of their military hero David, who should lead them in rebellion 
against the tyrant and restore them to freedom. Jesus claimed to be 
the Messiah and yet he made no direct effort to throw off the yoke of 
Rome. If Jesus was a good judge of relative values, and if political 
freedom is the ultimate value, why did he fail to make this supreme 
effort? Because he could have led an armed rebellion only by sacrificing 
a more precious possession—his way of life. For Jesus the pearl of 
great price was a never-failing attitude of love and goodwill toward all 
men, including even the most wicked of his Father’s children, expressed 
in a life of compassion, service and sacrifice for all. He could not 
- engage in war without abandoning this attitude and forsaking this way 
of life. The end, important as it was, did not justify the means, in- 
volving the utter denial of his spirit and teaching. There are only a few 
values so precious as political liberty. But even so valuable a possession 


53 


should not be purchased at the cost of abandoning Jesus’ way of life. 
There may be times, as was the case with Jesus, when the loss of politi- 
cal liberty should be endured temporarily rather than to make use of the 
weapons of Satan in seeking to cast out Satan. . 

Now what is Jesus’ way of life? It includes: the common Father- 
hood of God, the brotherhood of all men as members of one great family, 
the supreme value of every individual, the duty of sympathy and good- 
will, love even of one’s enemies, the absence of anger and hatred, the 
avoidance of retaliation and revenge, the duty of never-ending forgive- 
ness, the obligation of the strong to bear the burdens of the weak, the 
willingness of the innocent to serve and suffer for the guilty—all summed 
up in the cross of Calvary. When these two sets of realities are brought 
face to face, their absolute irreconcilability is obvious. The way of the 
sword and the way of the cross involve utterly different attitudes and 
practices. When it is remembered that in no modern war is the guilt 
all on one side, it becomes all the more evident that we are dealing here 
with two absolutely contradictory ways of life. It is, therefore, utterly 
impossible for me to imagine Jesus abandoning his own way of life and 
making use of the weapons and practices inherent in modern war. 

Kirby Page, “The Abolition of War.” 


THE CHURCH AND PEACE—HISTORICAL REVIEW 


Jesus’ teaching and example were understood as opposed to war by 
his followers and the early Church. Professor Harnack says that up 
to 150 A.D.,.“the possibility of the Christian as a soldier did not exist.” 
“The early Christian church was the first peace society.” The Chris- 
tians refused to take part in the defense of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. when it 
was destroyed and even as they had been warned to “flee to the moun- 
tains,” withdrew to Perea beyond Jordan. According to Justin Martyr 
(114-165 A.D.) the spirit of war and the spirit of Jesus are absolutely 
irreconcilable. Tertullian (145-220 A.D.) holds that a Christian should 
leave the army at once. Origen (230 A.D.) defied imperial conscription 
and his contemporary, Cyprian (200-258 A.D.), maintained that war is 
wholesale murder. “Homicide -is a crime when individuals commit it, 
it is called a virtue when it is called on publicly.” Arnobius and Lac- 
tantius (300 A.D.) both denounce war. In many instances Christians 
threw down their arms, saying, “I am a Christian and therefore I cannot 
fight.” “With one or two possible exceptions no soldier joined the 
Church and remained a soldier until the time of Marcus Aurelius (161- 
181 A.D.). Even then refusal to serve we know to be the normal policy of 
Christians as the reproaches of Celsus testify.” 

Celsus asks the Christians what would happen to the empire if all 
citizens like them refused to take up arms. The Council at Nicaea (325 
A.D.) refers to “those who being called by grace, have first shown their 
zeal and faith by abandoning the military profession, but afterwards 
have returned to it like dogs to their vomit. Let them be ‘hearers’ for 
three years and ‘penitent’ for ten years.” 

But when Constantine, the head of the army, became the virtual head 
of the Church, when the state took charge of religious affairs, the process 
of the nationalization and militarization of the Church began; and the 
influence of this semi-pagan movement has continued until this day. The 
cross now became under Constantine an imperial military emblem, bring- 
ing victory as a talisman of war. The official Church became at times the 
rubber stamp of the state. Athanasius is now ready to say, “To destrov 
opponents in war is lawful and worthy of praise.” By 416 A.D. non- 
Christians were forbidden to serve in the army; so the meek and peaceful 
Jesus became a God of battle,” and the cross an emblem of war. And 
even in our day the greatest armies and navies in the world are in the 


54 


a 


countries where there are the greatest number of Christians. John 
Morley is able to say, in the opening chapter of his volume on Voltaire, 
that “more blood has been shed for the cause of Christianity than for 
any other cause whatsoever.” And Mr. Lecky states that “with the 
exception of Mohammedanism, no other religion has done so much to 
produce war as was done by the religious teachers of Christendom dur- 
ing several centuries.” 

For fifteen centuries the official Church lost its conscience upon the 
subject of war. Only here and there a prophet or reformer raised his 
voice in protest, such as Francis of Assisi, John Wyclif, Peter Waldo, 
George Fox, William Penn, William Lloyd Garrison, Whittier, Tolsto1, 
the Moravians and the Society of Friends. Six centuries ago Dante 
called attention to the failure of Christianity to fulfill to mankind the 
promise of “peace on earth” made at the birth of Christ. 

But today the Church is awakening. Humanity is being stirred. Jesus 
Christ, once crucified and long neglected, but still the conscience of the 
race, is reasserting his call to peace. 


Sherwood Eddy, “The Abolition of War.” 


IS PACIFISM THE ONLY REMEDY? 


We strongly recommend the reading of the “Copec”’ Commission Re- 
port of 1924, volume VIII, on “Christianity and War,” as a thoughtful, 
well-balanced, brief and fair statement of the case, the more so as the 
editorial committee, unable to agree in all particulars, present typically 
divergent views. We give below brief extracts. The full report can 
be obtained from Longmans, Green & Co., London or New York, price 


$.70. 


DIVERGENT VIEWS 


Up to this point the members of the Commission were in agreement. 
But here a divergence appeared between those who, while believing 
all cases and circumstances wrong, and those others who, while believing 
that the development of Christianity under the guidance of the Holy 
Spirit must in the end show the utter incompatibility of the Gospel with 
war, yet hold that it may be not impossible at present to conceive of a 
religiously righteous war. It seemed best, therefore, to insert at this 
point in the Report two sections; the one putting the view generally 
known as pacifism; and the other stating the position of those who be- 
lieve that, hateful as war is, it cannot be absolutely condemned in all 
circumstances. 


POSITION OF THOSE WHO DO NOT ACCEPT PACIFISM 


Among all Christians there should be, although there are not as yet, 
the following common convictions about war: (1) that war is contrary 
to the spirit and purpose as well as the teaching of Christ; (2) that a 
Christian is bound to do all he can to promote the interests of peace and 
to prevent the provocation of war; (3) that any war of aggression of 
which the motive is greed, pride, selfishness or worldliness is wrong, 
should be unreservedly condemned and should be opposed by all available 
means of influencing public and popular sentiment, not only by individual 
Christians, but by Christian Churches in their corporate testimony and 
influence. (It has already been pointed out that an apparently aggressive 
war may be preventive or defensive, and here judgment is not so simple, 
although most Christians who have really thought out the question would 
mitigate their condemnation while withholding their approval.) The 


55 


issue seems to narrow itself down to this. Is even a war to resist invasion 
or to vindicate justice altogether wrong, evil as by its very nature we 
must regard war to be? This involves for the Christian these further 
question: Is Jesus’ teaching about non-resistance to wrong authoritative 
for all times and places? Is the redeeming grace of God in Christ the 
only method by which God deals with sin, or has righteous judgment a 
place in His Providence? Is Christian ethics a law to be rigidly obeyed 
regardless of varying circumstances, or is it an ideal to be realized grad- 
ually in correspondence with the total conditions of the human progress, 
in which the Divine purpose is being fulfilled? (These points are elab- 
orated in the Report.) 


PACIFIST POSLIZAON. 


A topical synopsis only is given here of a discussion which covers 
16 pages. 

1. The argument does not imply condemnation of those who hold 
opposing views. Recognition of duty is subjective. 

2. It is war that is under consideration, not the use of force 
in general. 

3. Even when a nation wages war in a just cause, the process of 
war itself produces moral degeneration more than offsetting the 
advantages gained. 

4. War is absolutely incompatible with the Christian standard as 
laid down by Jesus Christ. 

5. The Christian way of life, courageously followed, offers the 
only solution of the war problem. 

6. Christian love is not mere amiability or passivity. There is 
room for struggle, only certain weapons are forbidden. 

7. What is required is that we make the Kingdom of God the 
all-inclusive aim, regardless of consequences. 

8. The call is for a Holy Crusade for the abolition of war, con- 
ceived in the spirit of a Great Adventure on the part of the Church, 
supported by a mighty faith. 


A MIDDLE GROUND 


The alternative to pacifism is not necessarily expediency. Unwilling- 
ness to take a blanket pledge never to engage in war need not imply a 
willingness to engage in any war that may arise. A man may not be 
a pacifist and yet be far from supine in his attitude toward government. 
There may be for him as well as for the pacifist a place where if the 
demands of government run counter to the voice of conscience he will 
say, We ought to obey God rather than men. It may be recalled that 
Lloyd George, who led the government of Great Britain during much of 
the period of the World War, had strongly opposed the Boer War and 
had declined to support his country in that conflict. It is known that 
both Lincoln and Grant opposed the Mexican War. It must be recog- 
nized that many who hate war and who believe that every possible thing 
ought to be done for its prevention and abolition find it impossible to 
take either the completely pacifist attitude with all that that implies, or 
the attitude that identifies patriotism and good citizenship with the will- 
ingness under all circumstances to support the militaristic policy of a 
government or of a department of government. That theory of pa- 
triotism 1s repugnant to the higher idealism of the history and institutions 
of this republic. Not the subservience of serfs to a master but the 
loyalty of free men to free institutions is the American ideal. 


“The Congregationalist,” May 21, 1925. 
56 


A CONVINCED PACIFIST 


I am not going to deny that out of wars in past generations, or that 
out of this later terrible conflict, some good has not been wrought. Our 
-concern, however, is not with wars of the past, or a world of the past. 
We are challenged to stand face to face with what war has revealed it- 
self to be to our generation, and to ask ourselves the question, “Are we 
to continue to use ‘the past’s blood-rusted key’ to open the doors of to- 
morrow?” Many who read this will doubtless follow me, in all that I 
have said of the cruelty, the barbarity, and the futility of war, but still 
they are perplexed by a question, which for a long time blocked progress 
in my own thinking. I refer to the possibility of a day when the nation 
of which one is a citizen, after enduring with apparent patience the 
tyranny of another nation, goes to war, and calls its sons to battle. 
What shall a Christian do? I must repeat what I have already said, 
that, even could I trust distorted propaganda, I would still be sure that 
an armed international corflict, which would be an attempt of one side 
to annihilate another, would involve me, as a Christian, in something so 
utterly diabolical, that I could not participate in it. Ahead of my obli- 
gations as a citizen of one nation, come my obligations to the human 
family of all nations, and my obligations to God. 

S. Ralph Harlow, “The Greatest Issue of Our Generation.” 


57 


XI—FOREIGN MISSIONS AND WORLD PEACE 


TESTIMONY OF AN EDITOR 


I was impressed afresh with the unparalleled opportunity which 
America and Americans have in the Far East in asserting those influ- 
ences of goodwill and friendship so necessary in the maintenance of 
peace and in the promotion of genuine prosperity in those lands. 

Perhaps the deepest impression made upon me was that of an ex- 
traordinary modern miracle in the making ; namely, the reconciliation of 
great races. Every Sunday I attended church services. . . . Theres] 
saw Christian leaders, Chinese, Korean, Japanese, carrying forward the 
responsibility of their church services in forms and with a spirit that 
commanded my deepest admiration. In those strange tongues they were 
reading the same Bible that we read, offering prayer to the same Heaven- 
ly Father and singing the same great hymns of the Faith. In China and 
Korea I could not understand the words, but the spirit was altogether 
plain, especially when they sang hymns using the same tunes that we 
use, such as “My Faith Looks Up to Thee”; “What a Friend We Have 
in Jesus!”, “Rock of Ages, Cleft for Me”, “How Firm a Foundation !” 

Moreover it was evident from the relations manifest between mission- 
aries and native Christians that there were deep bonds of fellowship and 
friendship. Those Chinese, Korean, and Japanese pastors and mission- 
aries from the West really know and understand, trust and love each 
other. They have confidence in one another and flowing out from that _ 
relationship it is not too much to say that many millions of Orientals 
really believe that there are good and trustworthy white men. This 
could not have been said a century ago, or even fifty years ago. 

And through the influence of missionaries on their home lands public 
opinion towards Chinese, Koreans and Japanese has been modified in a 
very fundamental way. Millions of Occidentals have come to believe 
that there are good and trustworthy and honorable Orientals; the chasm 
between the East and the West is not impassable; the bridge of brother- 
hood and goodwill is growing broader and stronger every year. 

This is a wonderful achievement, a miracle, the most tremendous mir- 
acle of the ages. In it lies the hope of the world, for only through a 
most fundamental reconciliation of the great races of the East and 
the West is there hope of the ultimate peace of the world. 

Sidney L. Gulick, Report on Oriental Relations (in “Mobilizing 
for Peace,” edited by Frederick Lynch.) 


DR. W. A. P. MARTIN AND INTERNATIONAL LAW 


One of the greatest contributions of foreign missions to international 
understanding is the conveying and interpreting to the Chinese and Jap- 
anese nations of the principles of international law. This was the ac- 
complishment of Rev. W. A. P. Martin, D.D., L.L.D., missionary of the 
Presbyterian Board, U. S. A., at Peking, author of A Cycle of Cathay, 
for many years President of the Imperial Tungwen College. Finding the 
Chinese nation suffering grave disadvantages in their dealings with the 
Western Powers, through their ignorance of the rules and methods of 
international intercourse, Dr. Martin in 1862 undertook the translation 
into Mandarin of Wheaton’s Elements of International Law, a work that 
was destined to exert an influence upon two empires. It was welcomed 
alike by the Chinese officials and by Hon. Anson Burlingame, the minis- 
ter of the United States at Peking. Later on Dr. Martin translated the 
standard French work, De Marten’s Guide Diplomatique, Woolsey’s Ele- 


58 


ments of International Law, Bluntschli’s Volkerrecht. Most of the books 
were reprinted in Japan, and nothing additional on the subject was ren- 
dered into the language of either empire for over thirty years. 


HOW A MISSIONARY SECURED THE RETURN OF THE 
BOXER INDEMNITY 


America today is benefiting by the presence in her colleges and uni- 
versities of over 2,000 picked Chinese students. These young men and 
women bring to the American students a broader vision of the world, 
they help them to rise up out of their narrow provincialism into a world 
point of view. In many American institutions these Chinese students are 
among the most brilliant and earnest members of the undergraduate 
body. 

They bring a message of friendship from China to America. They take 
back a message of friendship from America to China. Many of these 
students are “Indemnity students.” The story of the Boxer Indemnity 
is too well known to dwell upon, but recently some inside information has 
been brought to light which may prove of interest to those students around 
the world who are interested in seeing nations deal with each other on 
the basis of justice and mutual understanding rather than by the way of 
the sword and mailed fist. It came about in this way: 


It was in the winter of 1906 that Dr. Smith was touring the churches 
in America in connection with a missionary campaign. In several of his 
addresses he advocated the return of the Boxer money as an act of com- 
mon honesty on the part of our Government, but urged that it should be 
done in such a way as to promote helpful relations between China and 
America, particularly in the matter of bringing Chinese students to Amer- 
ica for the finishing of their education. The suggestion aroused so much 
interest in his audiences that it was arranged that Dr. Smith should go to 
Washington and present the matter to President Roosevelt. Dr. Lyman 
Abbott, editor of The Outlook, became interested and offered to arrange 
the visit. Being unable to carry out his desire, he delegated his son, 
Mr. Lawrence Abbott, the present editor of The Outlook, to act in his 
stead. The interview proved so satisfactory that President Roosevelt, in 
collaboration with Secretary Elihu Root, set the wheels in motion, and 
without. delay the bill was passed by Congress which has made possible 
this splendid piece of international justice and co-operation. 


After the interview Dr. Smith wrote to his wife in China, as follows: 


“Mr. Roosevelt asked us to sit down, and Mr. Abbott begged me 
to say to Mr. Roosevelt what I had said to the Outlook staff one day 
when I dined with them. The President has a mind like an electrical 
machine— it is simply impossible to keep it still, but it is so sensitive 
that the least magnetism moves it. I knew exactly what I wanted to 
say, and was firing it off at a good rate, when every little while the 
President interrupted with an emphatic: ‘Dr. Smith, I agree with you 
exactly; now tell me what you want me to do.’ 

“The question was about using a part of the indemnity of twenty 
million dollars for the benefit of China, especially in the way of pay- 
ing expenses of students from China to the United States, to be dis- 
tributed throughout the country. ce 

“The President said: ‘You write me a letter saying what you 
think ought to be done, and I will consider it. You better go over to 
the State Department and see Root.’ We did not find ‘Root,’ but 
Mr. Bacon, the Assistant Secretary of State, to whom we explained 
what was in mind.” 


59 


Letter of President Roosevelt to Dr. Smith, of April 3, 1906: 


“Your very kind and pleasant letter has come. I agree with all 
you say and if we can adopt the policy you recommend I shall heartily 
favor it. I had been in doubt whether to try to use the indemnity as 
you suggest, merely because I hesitated as to whether the Chinese 
would not interpret it as an act of weakness; but I am inclined to 
take your judgment in the matter, and shall do so unless J see very 
strong reasons to the contrary are presented. I will take it up with 
Root forthwith. Meanwhile I need hardly say to you that I can in no 
way control the action of Congress.” 


JAPANESE-AMERICAN RELATIONS 


In 1907, when sensational newspapers in America were frantically pre- 
dicting a ‘Japanese attack upon the United States, one hundred and ten 
missionaries in Japan, representing more than twenty American Christian 
organizations, and residing in all sections of the Empire, published the fol- 
lowing statement: “As Americans residing in Japan, we feel bound to do 
all that is in our power to remove misunderstandings and suspicions which 
are intended to interrupt the long standing friendship between this nation 
and our own. Hence, we wish to bear testimony to the sobriety, sense of 
international justice, and freedom from aggressive designs exhibited by 
the great majority of the Japanese people, and to their faith in the tra- 
ditional justice and equity of the United States. Moreover, we desire to 
place on record our profound appreciation of the kind treatment which we 
experienced at the hands of both government and people; our belief that 
the alleged ‘belligerent attitude’ of the Japanese does not represent the 
real sentiments of the nation; and our ardent hope that local and spas- 
modic misunderstandings may not be allowed to affect in the slightest 
degree the natural and historic friendship of the two neighbors on opposite 
sides of the Pacific.” 

At the semicentennial celebration of Protestant missions in Japan, Oc- 
tober, 1909, a resolution was unanimously adopted which included the 
following sentences: “While the Government and people of Japan have 
maintained a general attitude of cordial ESSnOSUD for the United States, 
there has sprung up in some quarters of the latter country a spirit of dis- 
trust of Japan. . In this day of extensive and increasing commingling 
of races and civilizations, one of the prime problems is the maintenance 
of amicable international relations. Essential to this are not only just 
and honest dealings between governments, but also, as far as practicable, 
the prevention as well as the removal of race jealousy and misunder- 
standing between the peoples themselves. False or even exaggerated 
reports of the customs, beliefs or actions of other nations are fruitful 
causes of contempt, ill-will, animosity, and even war. If libel on an 
individual is a grave offense, how much more grave is libel on a nation?” 

Arthur Judson Brown, “The Mastery of the Far East.” 


IN THE SOUTH SEAS 


The missioner has brought peace to vast populations that knew no other 
manner of contact than that of strife and bloodshed. In the South Seas 
whole tribes were won from the decimating terrors of inter-tribal strife 
to a peace that has not been broken in two generations. The Fijians 
number more than 100,000 souls, and a more peaceful land is unknown; 
John Hunt found them living by war and cannibalism. The Battaks of 
Sumatra number 50,000, and are to-day a nation of cruel, superstitious, 
warlike folk won to the gentle arts of peace. The Sarawaks were 
among the most dangerous and thieving of aboriginal peoples; an English 


60 


traveler says that to-day a traveler may drop his portmanteau anywhere 
on the pathway, ramble in perfect peace where a few years ago his head 
would have been taken, and return to find his goods untouched. ‘The 
Zulus were perhaps the ablest and most competent militarists ever dis- 
covered among primitive peoples. They had a regular military organiza- 
tion with companies and corps, and a military law. Their fighting quali- 
ties are the equal of any living race, but they were won to arts of peace 
by the missionaries before the white trader made inroads upon them. 
In Uganda, Mackay found Mtesa ruling a well organized primitive state. 
His army, with its regularly constituted series of chieftains, was any- 
thing but a savage horde of undisciplined raiders, and was used to prey 
upon weaker neighboring tribes in a vast slave trade that counted its vic- 
tims by the thousands. To-day Winston Churchill says he never 
traveled in a more law-abiding, peaceful land, and lays his tribute of praise 
upon the head of the missionary. 

Alva W. Taytor, “The Social Work of Christian Missions” 


ENDING A WAR 


Barraka nation has been engaged in war with a nation contiguous for 
more than a hundred years. They don’t march out in a solid body and 
fight it out, but waylay small parties on their farms, and the women 
when gathering wood and carrying water are butchered in cold blood. 
To cross. each “other's boundary lines is death. But Jasper, one of our 
native local preachers at Barraka, got a commission from God about a 
year ago to cross the death line "alone and go straight to the king of 
the belligerent nation; and he immediately obeyed orders. He told the 
king that God had sent him to see him and ask him to assign him a 
house in which he and half a dozen of his fellow-Christians from 
Barraka might pray to the God that made the heavens for him and his 
people. The king received him kindly and granted his request; and at 
the time appointed Jasper and his band of praying men assembled in 
the house assigned and commenced their work—the reconciliation of two 
heathen nations that had been at war for more than a hundred years. 
After they had prayed a few nights, Jasper submitted another proposi- 
tion to the king, requesting him to order a peace palaver to be held each 
day in conjunction with the prayers of each night. The king consented, 
and issued an order for the assembling of his councilors. Jasper’s band 
prayed twenty-eight nights (on two or three occasions they prayed all 
night), until a permanent peace was effected between the two belligerent 
nations, and now they are hand and glove in mutual attachment. 

Missionary Society of the M. E. Church, Report, 1895. 


GREEK SAVES TURK 


Eighteen different nationalities attended the Y.M.C.A. camp of Con- 
stantinople last summer. The season was characterized by the usual 
splendid international friendship. This striking incident happened. A 
Turkish leader from Angora was swimming and got beyond his depth. 
When about exhausted he called for help and the Greek Swimming In- 
structor rescued him. The Turk made a public statement that he owed 
his life to his friend Mike, and went across the dining-room, embraced 
Mike, kissed him on both cheeks and shook his hand warmly. The crowd 
broke forth into mighty applause and for the remainder of the camp 


there was a splendid spirit of unity. 
The World’s Youth, February, 1925. 


61 


THE FUNCTION OF THE MISSIONARY 


We have been talking about disarmament. You know that war does 
not dwell in airplanes or in battleships; it dwells in the hearts of men. 
The greatest disarmer of hate is love. You don’t take darkness out of 
a cellar with a shovel or a spoon; you take it out by putting light in. 
You can not get hate out of men’s hearts by prohibitions and restrictions 
and “thou shalts.” You do it by putting love in the place of hate. 
Whether in our great cities of this land, or on our frontiers, or with the 
immigrants who fill our ports of entry, or in lands across the seas, I 
say the function of the missionary, whether his work be at home: or 
abroad, is to teach men to live together in relations based upon love, and 
not hate, or fear, or suspicion. 

Evelyn Riley Nicholson, From an address at the Conference on 

the Cause and Cure of War, Washington, January 18-24, 1925. 


FOREIGN MISSIONS AND WORLD PEACE 


The cause of world peace owes more to the ambassadors of the Chris- 
tian faith than to any other single agency. Among savage tribes they 
have gone repairing the damage done by the white man’s rum, his vices, 
his cruelties. But among the older and stronger peoples the missionary 
has constantly been mediator and interpreter. “No single person,” said 
the Japan Mail, “has done as much as the missionary to bring foreigners 
and Japanese into close intercourse.” . . . In his legitimate capacity as 
interpreter of one race to another, the missionary has in thousands of 
cases removed perilous misunderstandings and cemented bonds of in- 
ternational amity. 

The federation of the world cannot be brought about by laws, or tribu- 
nals, or treaties, so long as the world lacks a unifying force. What shall 
that force be? The expansion of commerce? The influence of universi- 
ties? The power of the press? The growing organization of labor? All 
these things may help mightily toward the great goal of universal peace; 
but they are instruments, not creators. University and newspaper and 
labor federation are the channels through which the stream may flow, 
not the stream itself. The real power is in the ever-flowing conviction 
of human brotherhood based on divine Fatherhood. The real power is 
the proclamation of the divine unity and love, and the human unity and 
love which must follow. Christianity gives certain root-ideas, certain 
primal convictions, deeper than all differences in costume or custom, in 
habits and laws. And these root-ideas, concerning the relation of all 
men to one another and to God, once accepted, will create a world unity 
that must endure. Before we can have international peace, we must 
have international conscience and international friendship. . . . 

An international friendship is composed of the friendship of individuals. 
There are today twenty-five thousand American and European missionaries 
scattered throughout the world, each one of them a devoted friend of some 
foreign tribe or nation or race, demonstrating his friendship by offering 
his life. And each one of them is propagating his friendliness among 
his relatives, his supporting churches, and his fellow countrymen at 
home. Can we over-estimate the silent force of such invisible international 
bonds? Each missionary life is but a slender filament stretched between 
the nations, but all together they constitute a woven network from 
which no nation can escape. If yellow journalism seeks to inflame the 
American mind against Japan, the American apostles, who have resided 
there for a quarter century, make the most effective reply. If fear of 
the Chinese, or the Hindus, spreads on the Pacific coast, the best answer 
is to be found in the confidence of missionaries who have lived among 


62 


those races for years and find much to admire and love. The outbreaks 
of petty animosity, the flarings up of old race prejudice, find their con- 
stant antidote in the attitude of men who can say: “We know this 
nation; we can interpret its inner self; we know it to be worthy of 
honor and fellowship. Do to these people as you want them to do to 


’ 


you. bee 
W.H.P. Faunce, from “The Social Aspects of Foreign Missions.” 


THE PROPER CHRISTIAN ATTITUDE TOWARD 
RECENT EVENTS IN CHINA 


This is a translation of an article by Chin-Chang P’eng, 
pastor of the Kung Li Hui Church, Peking. It first ap- 
peared in “The Truth,” (1925) a Christian weekly of North 
China. It was written when General Feng made lis famous 
coup d’état, concérning which the opinion of Christians was 
divided. The article shows the best thought upon the problem 
which the rise of General Feng has given the Church. We 
are told that a large number, if not the majority, of thinking 
Chinese Christian leaders of today do not believe in war, 
but rather go to the extent of saying that all war is and must 
be anti-Christian in its spirit and fruits. 


Christianity-is not withdrawal from the world but activity in the world, 
and relation to all that is human. For this reason the Christian cannot 
but feel the effects, direct or indirect, of social or governmental changes. 
As the Christian cannot avoid social responsibility, so he must take a 
hand in all social change. But although the Church is actively in the 
world, it cannot follow worldly methods. Besides the ordinary methods 
of meeting events, it must have a special viewpoint higher than that of 
the general run of men. Only so can it act as the “light of the world.” 

The Christian must have a clear moral sense. When he criticizes a 
situation, he must employ principles and not base his judgment vpon the 
question of who is involved. The question of the right and wrong of 
war as a method does not depend upon whether a Christian is involved or 
not. Only if it is right, no matter who wages it, can it be said to be 
right. If it is wrong, no matter who promotes it, we must call it wrong. 
We cannot make war a right Christian principle just because a certain 
prominent Christian promotes it. As, for instance, in the present cir- 
cumstances, the Christian general, Feng Yii Hsiang, is the most promi- 
nent figure. We remember that when General Feng started off to oppose 
Chang Tso-Lin there was a class of Christians who said with shining 
faces: “General Feng is off to kill the robbers. He will surely suc- 
ceed.” Then suddenly came the report, he is back in Peking to establish 
peace, and they said, “Ah, that is a true Christian’s action!” My friend, 
what are your principles? Is your moral sense reliable, and if so, what 
is its value? If you record yourself as opposed to war, no matter what 
war, then you must oppose all war, and take an extreme position so that 
there is not the slightest room for it. Hence the writer hopes that 
General Feng will ultimately bring his purpose of peace to its conclusion. 
If he withdraws from military life and becomes a farmer, the writer’s 
hopes will be fulfilled. 

I do not believe war can create the Kingdom of God. If it were true 
that militarism can create the Kingdom of God, Jesus made a mis- 
take in the choice of his program. Thus we can say that General 
Feng’s success or failure, although it may concern national progress, can- 
not properly create real or lasting effect upon the Church. Most certainly 
his success or failure cannot be interpreted as either glorious or shameful 


63 


for the Church. Since military science cannot be gotten from the Bible, 
and since war is something outside religious instruction, the outcome of 
the present struggle is evidently apart from Christ. Although there are 
Christians who uphold defensive war, and reasonably, still I do not be- 
lieve there is any one who would say that the Kingdom of Heaven comes 
by using militarism. Although there are those who admit that a Chris- 
tian may fight, still I cannot believe any one would allow that the victory 
or defeat of a Christian in battle reflects either glory or shame upon 
Christ. Therefore my second point is that the Church is quite separate 
from the victory or defeat of any of its members in battle. Therefore 
General Feng’s arrival in power may effect the hopes of China, but it 
cannot be said to hold any hopes for the Christian Church. 

The writer does not mean by the foregoing that by fighting General 
Feng has severed himself from the Christian Church. What is meant is 
simply that the Church cannot be associated with his success or defeat. 
As to Mr. Feng as a church member (not as a general), the success or 
failure of the Church and the Kingdom have intimate connection with 
him. As aman he jis apart from his position and power, and only the 
power of his personal character is concerned. For the real work of the 
Christian Church is the promotion of character. The transforming power 
of the Christian Church is measured by its influence upon personal char- 
acter. The plan of Jesus in founding the Church was that it might use 
the influence of Jesus’ mightly character to change men. Thus, although 
Feng has become a general, his character will still be brought to bear 
upon the Church and God’s Kingdom because he is a church member. 
Furthermore his personal character itself cannot be said to advance or 
diminish with the success or defeat of his military operations. Hence, 
if we, his fellow-Christians, are really concerned about Feng’s progress, 
we ought to keep our eyes fixed on his character; and if we are concerned 
about the Kingdom of God, we ought to think of his character. If we 
could, directly or indirectly, help in his growth of character, this would 
be our greatest contribution to him and to the Kingdom. (The writer 
has never seen General Feng and would not venture to adjudge his merits 
or faults. Taking the Feng soldiers as representatives, the writer, al- 
though fundamentally opposed to war, would acknowledge that Feng is 
a very unusual military man.) 

The third request which I would make of my intelligent Christian 
friends is that outside of merely praising General Feng’s good points, we 
use a little thought to help him to be more like Christ. This is our part 
as his comrades in the Church. 


[BOTH EE CHURGE sR Hi spor 


If the Church refuses to hear this call to new and higher service, one 
of two things will happen. Either our civilization will go on to another 
world war and then another and perish of its own mad_ efficiency, or 
men and women of goodwill the world over will painfully organize, for 
this job of ending war, a new world-expression of man’s moral force. 
And this, whatever it call itself, whatever form it take, will be Christian 
in spirit, harmonizing with the majestic purposes of God. But what. 
an indictment of our Churches! The historian of 2200 A.D., reviewing 
events in their true perspective, may write that unchurched men and 
women did this thing in the spirit of Christ, unhelped—nay, hampered 
and criticized—by the pledged and anointed servants of Christ! 

Will Irwin, “Christ or Mars?” 


64 


INTERNATIONAL IDEALS OF THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST 


1, 


2. 
3. 


WE BELIEVE that nations no less than individuals are subject 
to God’s immutable moral laws. 

WE BELIEVE that nations achieve true welfare, greatness and 
honor only through just dealing and unselfish service. 

WE BELIEVE that nations that regard themselves as Christian 
have special international obligations. 


4. WE BELIEVE that the spirit of Christian brotherliness can remove 


i A ie 


every unjust barrier of trade, color, creed and race. 
WE BELIEVE that Christian patriotism demands the practice of 
good-will between nations. 


WE BELIEVE that international policies should secure equal justice 
for all races. 


. WE BELIEVE that all nations should associate themselves per- 


manently for world peace and good-will. 


. WE BELIEVE in international law, and in the universal use of in- 


ternational courts of justice and boards of arbitration. 
WE BELIEVE in a sweeping reduction of armaments by all nations. 
WE BELIEVE in a warless world, and dedicate ourselves to its 
achievement. 
Adopted, Dec. 1921, by the Federal Council of the 
Churches of Christ in America. 


XII—STRIKING SENTENCES 


If we do not destroy War, War will destroy us. 
Lord Bryce 


Life from top to bottom is one. We cannot be Christians in our homes 
and pagan in our politics. The Golden Rule is for all nations. The 
Great Commandment is for all people. 

Charles E. Jefferson. 


We are participants, whether we would or not, in the life of the world. 
The interests of all nations are our own also. We are partners with 
the rest. What affects mankind is inevitably our affair, as well as the 
affair of the nations of Europe and of Asia. 

Woodrow Wilson. 


I doubt if war ever really settled anything. It unsettles everything. 
Napoleon. 


The more I study the world, the more am I convinced of the inability 


of brute force to create anything durable. 
Napoleon. 


Peace is not the product of documents. Peace is the product of good 


will among men. 
Hoover. 


The most effective factor in getting rid of armaments would be to sub- 
stitute for national hatred and rivalries a sense of the brotherhood 
of nations such as our Lord inculcated upon individual men. ‘The idea 
that “we are all members one of another” needs to be applied to peoples. 


Lord Bryce. 


Give the children a true idea of war in their history books and the 
next generation would no more want a war than they would want an 
earthquake. 

Zangwill. 


The safe conduct of democracy on its bold voyage of philosophic dis- 
covery depends on an enforced goodwill, kindliness, and hearty co- 
operation. 

President Eliot. 


The true sovereign of the world, who molds the world like soft wax 
according to his pleasure, is he who lovingly sees into the world. 
Carlyle. 


My urgent advice to you would be not only always to think first of 
America, but always, also, to think first of humanity. You do not love 
humanity if you seek to divide humanity into jealous camps. Humanity 
can be welded together only by love, by sympathy, by justice, and not by 


jealousy. 
Woodrow Wilson. 


The sum of the whole matter is this, that our civilization cannot sur- 
vive materially unless it be redeemed spiritually. It can be saved only by 
becoming permeated with the spirit of Christ and being made free and 
happy by the practices which spring out of that spirit. Only thus can dis- 
content be driven out and all the shadows lifted from the road ahead. 


Woodrow Wilson. 
66 


We are engaged in a race between catastrophe and education. 
H. G. Wells. 


So long as we spend three-quarters or more of every tax dollar on war, 
past, present, or to come, just so long we shall be unable to do as we wish 
by our schools. The one big job today is to take the money out, of war 
and put it into schools. Quit betting on gunpowder and bet on the kids. 

Collier’s. 


The hope of the world is in the younger generation. Civilization, as I 
see it, can only be saved by its children, and not by them if they are 
brought up like their elders, in the same narrow way. 

Sir Philip Gibbs. 


Peace will come when there is realization that only under a reign of 
law, based on righteousness and supported by the religious conviction of 
the brotherhood of man, can there be any hope of a complete and satis- 
fying life. Parchment will fail, the sword will fail; it is only the 


spiritual nature of man that can be triumphant. 
President Coolidge. 


The war to end war will not be fought with guns. 
Unknown. 


The causes of. war are profound; but the occasions of war are slight. 
: Aristotle. 


Civilization is a partnership, and no one can tell from what nation or 
continent its finest gifts will come. What did Rome expect from Pales- 


tine? 
Alfred E. Zimmern, New York Times. 


67 


XITI—POETRY 


IN HEARTS TOO YOUNG 


In hearts too young for enmity 
There lies the way to make men free; 
When children’s friendships are world-wide, 
New ages will be glorified. 
Let child love child, and strife will cease, 
Disarm the hearts, for that is Peace. 
Ethel Blair Jordon. 


RECESSIONAL 


The tumult and the shouting dies; 
The captains and the kings depart: 
Still stands Thine ancient sacrifice, 
An humble and a contrite heart. 
Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet, 
Lest we forget—Lest we forget! 
Rudyard Kipling. 


A NEW EARTH 


God grant us wisdom in these coming days, 

And eyes unsealed, that we clear visions see 

Of that new world that He would have us build, 
To Life’s ennoblement and His high ministry. 


Not since Christ died upon His lonely cross 

Has Time such prospect held of Life’s new birth; 
Not since the world of chaos first was born 

Has man so clearly visaged hope of a new earth. 


Not of our own might can we hope to rise 

Above the ruts and failures of the past 

But, with His help who did the first earth build, 

With hearts courageous we may fairer build this last. 


John Oxenham. 


THE FEDERATION OF THE WORLD 


For I dipt into the future, far as human eye could see, 

Saw the vision of the world and all the wonder that would be: 
Saw the heavens fill with commerce, argosies of magic sails, 
Pilots of the purple twilight, dropping down with costly bales. 


Heard the heavens fill with shouting and there rained a ghastly dew 
From the Nation’s airy navies grappling in the central blue; 

Far along the world-wide whisper of the south wind rushing warm 
With the standards of the peoples plunging through the thunderstorm. 


Till the war-drum throbbed no longer and the battle-flags were furled 
In the Parliament of man, the Federation of the World. 

Then a common sense of most shall hold a fretful realm in awe, 

And the kindly earth shall slumber lapt in universal law. 


68 


Tennyson. 


IN CHRIST NO EAST. NOR WEST 


In Christ there is no East nor West, 
In him no South nor North, 

But one great fellowship of love 
Throughout the whole wide earth. 

In him shall true hearts everywhere 
Their high communion find. 

His service is the golden cord 
Close-binding all mankind. 


Join hands, then, brothers of the faith, 
What’er your race may be! 
Who serves my father as a son 
Is surely kin to me. 
In Christ now meet both East and West, 
In him meet South and North, 
All Christly souls are one in him 
Throughout the whole wide earth. 
John Oxenham. 


BROTHERHOOD 


The crest and crowning of all good, 

Life’s final star, is Brotherhood; 

For it will bring again to Earth 

Her long-lost Poesy and Mirth; 

Will send new light on every face, 

A kindly power upon the race. 

And till it come, we men are slaves, 

And travel downward to the dust, of graves. 


Come, clear the way, then, clear the way: 
Blind creeds and kings have had their day. 
Break the dead branches from the path: 
Our hope is in the aftermath— 
Our hope is in heroic men, 
Star-led to build the world again. 
To this Event the ages ran: 
Make way for Brotherhood—make way for Man. 
Edwin Markham. 


69 


ILLUSIONS OF WAR 


War 

I abhor, 

And yet how sweet 

The sound along the marching street 
Of drum and fife! And I forget 
Wet eyes of widows, and forget 
Broken old mothers, and the whole 
Dark butchery without a soul. 


Without a soul—save this bright drink 
Of heady music, sweet as death; 
And even my peace-abiding feet 
Go marching with the marching street; 
For yonder, yonder, goes the fife, 
And what care I for human life! 


The tears fill my astonished eyes, 

And my full heart is like to break; 
And yet ’tis all embannered lies, 

A dream those little drummers make. 


O, it is wickedness to clothe 

Yon hideous grinning thing that stalks 
Hidden in music, like a queen 

That in a garden of glory walks, 
Till good men love the thing they loathe! 


Art, thou hast many infamies, 
But not an infamy like this. 
O, snap the fife, and still the drum, 
And show the monster as she is! 
Richard Le Gallienne. 


NEVER BE DISCOURAGED 


For while the tired waves, vainly breaking, 
Seem here no painful inch to gain, 

Far back, through creeks and inlets making, 
Comes, silent, flooding in, the main, 

And not by Eastern windows only, 
When daylight comes, comes in the light; 

In front the sun climbs slow, how slowly, 
But westward, look, the land is bright. 


Arthur Hugh Clough. 


70 


GOD END WAR 


God end War! but when brute War is ended, 

Yet there shall be many a noble soldier, 

Many a noble battle worth the winning, 

Many a hopeless battle worth the losing. 
Life is battle, 

Life is battle, even to the sunset. 


Soldiers of the Light shall strive forever, 

In the wards of pain, the ways of labor, 

In the stony deserts of the city, 

In the hives where greed has housed the helpless; 
Patient, valiant, 

Fighting with the powers of death and darkness. 


Make us mingle in that heavenly warfare; 

Call us through the throats of all brave bugles 

Blown on fields foregone by lips forgotten ; 

Nerve us with the courage of lost comrades, 
Gird us, lead us, 

Thou, O Prince of Peace and God of Battles. 


Helen Gray Cone, From “Soldiers of the Light.” 


THE REFORMER 


Before the monstrous wrong he sets him down— 

One man against, a stone-walled city of sin. 

For centuries those walls have been a-building, 

Smooth porphyry, they slope and coldly glass 

The flying storm and wheeling sun. No chink, 

No crevice lets the thinnest arrow in. 

He fights alone, and from the cloudy ramparts 

A thousand evil faces jibe and jeer him. 

Let him lie down and die: what is the right, 

And where is justice, in a world like this? 

But by and by, earth shakes herself, impatient, 

And down, in one great roar of ruin, crash 

Watch-tower and citadel and battlements. 

When the red dust has cleared, the lonely soldier 

Stands with strange thoughts beneath the friendly stars. 
Edward Rowland Sill, 


71 


XIV—EDUCATIONAL METHODS 


EDUCATIONAL AIMS 


Children should be taught 

(1) the truth about modern warfare and what a “next” war would 
be like. 

(2) the history of the great effort toward peace in which men and 
women in all nations are now engaged. This should include the stories 
of great men who throughout history have struggled to rid the world of 
war; the present tremendous strength of the peace movement, the fact that 
the man or nation who leads the world to peace will be the great hero 
of the ages. 

(3) the fact that war is not “inevitable”; that it is merely one means 
of settling disagreements among nations. (Duelling as a result of per- 
sonal quarrels was much closer to an inherent instinct than is organized 
war fare. ) 

(4) the steady unification and interdependence of the world. 

(5) the extravagant cost and danger of competitive armaments. 

(6) appreciation of fair play and a square deal. 

(7) a world-mindedness, sympathetic appreciation of other peoples, 
and interest in world affairs. 


Educational Survey. Compiled by National Council for 
Prevention of War, Washington, D. C. 


ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND HIGH SCHOOL 


The elementary school plays a vital part in giving “set” to the 
child’s mind in his attitude toward other peoples, and the high school 
takes the stronger ones in sufficiently great numbers to enable it to move » 
the great tides of public opinion. 


Wilford M. Aikin, Director, Scarborough School, N. Y. 


LESSON ON WORLD FRIENDSHIP AND WORLD PEACE 
By Mary JENNESS 


Aim: To SuHow that missionary work is the most effective means to 
world peace because it strikes at the causes of war. 

BisLtE: Luxe 2. 14; Romans 14. 17; Luke 10. 27-38; Matt. 5. 23. 

To The Teacher: Plan this session as a debate. “Resolved: That 
the spread of Christianity is the best means of preventing war.” But 
remember three things: A church school debate must not leave all the 
work to four or six people; also, since the negative tends to get con- 
vinced on the wrong side of the question, morally, you must provide 
some way of winning them back afterward; and you must include even 
the backward members in the following discussion so that the class as 
a unit may take some definite action. Therefore, leave more than half 
the class period for an open forum to follow the debate. Suggest that 
your leaders assign definite topics for quiet members to report on, these 
reports to be worked in as part of the debate, for example: “What 
Livingstone did for peace in Africa,” “What medical missions have done 
for peace.” You will need at least three preliminary meetings, one for 
the whole class and one after sides have been chosen and working. 

For Both Sides: Is it Unanswerable? Admiral Yamamoto, former 
premier of Japan, speaking of the exclusion clause, said, “The worst 
hurt was not inflicted upon Japan, but upon the cause of international 


72 


peace. It will take years for Japan to forget this insult and rally again 
to the support of cooperative effort. No amount of Christian preaching 
or missionary work can convince us now that Christianity is an effective 
preventive of wars and racial struggling.” 

AFFIRMATIVE: The spread of Christianity prevents war by removing 
its causes in human nature: greed, hate, fear, desire for domination, 
revenge or territory (both sides should agree on this and the following 
list or substitute their own). Whereas Christianity is summed up by 
the Good Samaritan, the Golden Rule, the Eleventh Commandment. 

I. Love can do what force cannot (story of Livingstone, Mary Sles- 
sor, Neesima, etc.) 

II. Love makes brotherhood which automatically shuts out class 
struggles (story of Livingstone, Grenfell of Africa, the breakdown of 
caste in India, influence of international schools and educational missions). 

III. Love builds the only stable social order (story of industrial 
missions, Cf. Grenfell quotation below). 

IV. Love makes permanent conquests for civilization (story of medi- 
cal missions to open the door, and educational to hold it open). 

QuoraTiIon (thought-providing merely): “It is peace!” cried Living- 
stone as he waded ashore in the face of a hundred arrows—safe. 


“To-day all up the 1,500 miles of Congo waterway the power of the 
work done by Grenfell and the men who came with him and after him, 
has changed all the life. Gone are the slave-raiders, the inter-tribal 
wars, the cruelties of the white men. . . . There stand instead Negroes 
who can make bricks, build houses, turn a lathe, engineers, printers, 
Bee carpenters, worshipping in churches built with their own 

ands.” 


Basil Mathews, “Book of Missionary Heroes.” 


“Christian education alone can give the leadership that will recreate 
Nearer Asia, and the facts of the Near East prove that such leadership 
can be developed.” 


Robert College and International College, Beirut, etc., | 
Prince Feisal of Arabia. 


“The cheapness of human life is the basis for militarism, the value of 
human life the basis of Christianity.” 
Tyler Dennett, “A Better World.” 


“Just as the Wesleyan movement in England, by arousing the indus- 
trial classes and making them accustomed to democratic methods, con- 
tributed to saving England from the bloody class and industrial conflicts 
such as are sweeping over Europe, so by the same methods Christianity 
can save the world.” 

Ibid. 


“Jesus came, and did a thing that is . . . utterly incredible. It is 
as though he said, ‘I am going to turn the world upside down, I am 
going to wield such an influence as has never been known in history; 
two thousand years from now I will . . . commandeer the allegiance of 
men as never has been done by any emperor . . . and to do that I will 
trust nothing but spiritual forces; good-will, reasonableness, the appeal 
to the responsiveness of the man’s best self. I will trust nothing else, but 
I will trust them to the limit, though they take me to the cross.’ But 
he has done it. It is history. This last Easter time more knees bowed 
at the thought of the cross than ever before in time.” 


Fosdick, “Christian Century,’ June 12, 1924. 
73 


Tue NEGATIVE, however, has a strong position: 


I. There may be brotherhood on the mission field, but there is not 
among European “Christian” nations. (See daily press !) 


II. Christians rule seventy per cent of the world (Inter-Church World 
Survey, Foreign, VI), but not on Christian principles. England forced 
opium on China, the United States has sent millions of dollars’ worth 
of rum to Africa by private individuals unchecked by the Government. 
The United States has just cut the tap-root of missions in Japan by the 
exclusion clause. 


III. Christianity is a cause of revolution and uprising of native 
people because it produces the desire for self-government. India is the 
best example, Korea the next best. 


QUOTATIONS: 


“The missionaries make bad the hearts of the people and teach them 


democracy.” 
Japanese Newspaper. 


“The democracy of the Methodist movement was founded on the 
eternal possibility of every man. 
Tyler Dennett. 


True, but how long will the empire of England last when Asia’s eyes 
are fully opened to her possibilities? Is the next great war to start here? 


IV. The Christian principle of brotherhood has never crossed the 
color line. (American treatment of Indians, of Chinese, and Japanese 
in this country, culminating in exclusion clause, the Jim Crow cars, etc.) 


QUOTATION : 


“To the Mohammedan every other Mohammedan, white, yellow, brown, 
black, is his brother. To the Christian, every white Christian is his 


brother.” 
T. H. P. Sailer, Presbyterian Board. 


DISCUSSION: 


Now follow your rebuttals by an open forum to include every member 
of the class. If your affirmative has done half as well as they should, 
the class knows the Christian foundation for peace. Are they ready to 
draw up a class resolution in favor of the Methodist General Conference 
action against war, this to be read to their church school, in their church, 
and eae in the local paper? Such action is the logical end of such 
a debate. 


PROJECT: 


The entire debate culminating in such a resolution is a worthwhile 
peace project.and should be so handled from the start. Also, set the 
class to finding out what chances for inter-racial brotherhood exist in 
their own town—this by way of practising international peace at home. 


74 


REFERENCES : 


Whatever you can find. W orld Friendship, Inc. (good for industrial 
missions), Life of Livingstone, “The Noble Army” by Ethel Hubbard, 
Mary Slessor, Neesima, The World Service Volume, especially sections 
of Medical Missions, Educational and Industrial. 

Closing Hymn. 


TEACHING PEACE THROUGH HISTORY 


To try to teach history in true perspective, from an international in- 
stead of a merely national standpoint, from a social instead of a militar- 
istic one, is not only essential to the intelligent handling of this subject, 
but is one of the greatest services we can render the next generation. 

. . Moreover, it is necesary to point out the mixture of motives and 
the evil result of even the most idealistic of wars, and to hold up for 
admiration men and women who could do something more constructive 
for their fellows than plan a military campaign or win a battle. War 
shown in its reality, with causes, motives, and results, is shorn of glory. 
The victories of the human spirit in science, invention, art, literature, 
architecture, agriculture—in fact, the struggle towards civilization, in 
all countries and AGEL es show splendidly by contrast. 

Janet Payne Whitney, “What Teachers can do to Educate for Peace.” 


You can help the child, indeed it is impossible that you shall do 
other than help the child, toward respect or disrespect for other peo- 
ples, toward sympathy or antagonism, toward understanding or mis- 
understanding. In other words, we are bound, whether we wish it or 
not, to help toward peace and world organization or help toward mis- 
understanding and war. The geography teacher has a great responsibility 
in introducing the child to his neighbors upon this earth. . . 

The wide open road to teaching respect is furnished by the skill of 
foreign peoples. Look at the Eskimo’s boat, made in some cases of 
skins sewed together with sinews and stretched around a framework of 
bones. In this skillfully made boat sits the lone paddler with his blouse 
of waterproof skin bound tightly around the opening of the boat, around 
his wrists and his neck. If his boat upsets no water can get into it. 
With a flip of his paddle he turns it upright and paddles on. This is 
one of the most marvellous marine creations of the human race. We 
Es morning: that can rival it; and look at the materials of which it is 
made! 

It is easy to see reasons why the Eskimo’s house is of skin or snow, 
why the mountaineer’s house is of wood, that of the desert of sundried 
brick, that in the tropic forest of grass or thatch, of the city of burned 
brick, and that of Italy of stone. It is equally true that the foreigner has 
done what he has done for what seems to him to be a good reason and 
it is probably true that if we had been in his position we would have 
done as he has done. 

We can go on this way with all the various peoples of the world. 
Once the teacher has the theme, the great idea, the material is at hand 
or easily to be found for the inculcation of respect for many other achieve- 
ments—German science, French art, Chinese and Japanese art, the skill 
of the South American Indian who makes the Panama hat. 

The great spiritual and mental test for success in the teaching of 
geography is, as I have said, the creation of understanding. 

We, the teachers of geography should realize that the frequently recur- 
ring opportunities of the geography class means this—that to us more 
than to all other social agencies combined, is given the power to decide 
whether war shall wreck us all or whether we shall put it into the limbo 


75 


where now the personal duel resides—buried by a better method. This 
opportunity of the geography teacher is made even greater than it seems 
by the fact that most adult activities are bent toward the realization of 
desires conceived before the age of fifteen years. 
J. Russel Smith, “Geography and the Higher Citizenship” 
in Progressive Education, 1925. 


TEACHING A COOPERATIVE WORLD 


Geography has immense scope. First in the conception of our earth 
as a whole, a little unit in the universe, give the child a sense of its own 
country as only a part of the whole, which it can never lose. Second, 
show the variations of earth’s surface in climate, undulation, etc., and 
the effect of these geographical conditions upon national character. Third, 
study the interdependence of the nations upon each other’s natural re- 
sources—oil here, timber there, salt somewhere else, fruit, coal, water- 
power—and the great international service of commerce, on its finest 
side, in distributing the world’s resources so that each country may 
benefit by the natural advantages or acquired skill of all the rest. Fourth, 
emphasize the insanity of a world divided against itself. The Kingdom 
of the future will be a cooperative world, where all nations share freely 
of their best to the advantage of all, and national ownership of rich 
tracts of country ceases to be a selfish advantage, and therefore a 
temptation. 

Janet Payne Whitney, “What Teachers Can Do to Educate 
for Peace,’ American Friend, 1923. 


ATHLETICS AND WORLD FRIENDSHIP 


Standing on the touchline of the football field of the American Uni- 
versity at Beirut on a crisp afternoon in spring, I saw streaming dowr 
from the pavilion a team such as I had never before even imagined in 
my wildest athletic dreams. The captain was a negro from Egypt, 
thickset, but a fast and accurate shot. His full-backs were a Turk and 
an Armenian; the half-backs and the forwards included a Syrian Chris- 
tian from the Lebanon, a Greek, other Turks, a Persian and a Copt 
from Egypt. Their trainer was an Irishman. The Principal of the 
College was American. In the College were nine hundred boys from 
all those lands. 

The football field was on Asiatic soil; but the people represented were 
drawn, not only from four separate races in Asia—the Syrian Arab, 
the Armenian, the Turk and the Persian—but the Negro came from 
Africa, the Greek from Europe, the trainer from the British Isles, and 
the Principal from America. Every continent had its man. All the 
world was represented. 

As I stood watching the members of the team take their places and 
the opposing team move out to face them, and then heard the whistle 
blow and saw the game surge down and up the field, I could see that 
they were playing a really magnificent team game. Talking with the 
sports-captain of the College who was standing by me I asked: “What 
special difficulty do you find in training a team like this?” 

“A real hard nut to crack,” he replied, “is just this. These fellows 
come from countries where the whole idea of team-play is unknown. 
Each at the beginning of his football training wants to dribble the 
ball down the field at his own feet and score the goal himself for his 
own glory.” (“It is just the same,” he interjected, “if you are teaching 
them baseball or cricket or hockey.”) “So,” he went on, “I have won 


76 


the battle, not only for the boy as a member of the team, but really for 
his whole life-job, when I have taught him to pass.” 

I looked again and realized the simple miracle that had been per- 
formed. There was the Armenian full-back (whose father had been 
massacred by a Turk) passing to the Turk who sent the ball out to 
a forward wing, the Greek, and he to the Persian who centred to the 
negro captain whe, amid a roar of cheering from the College, scored 
a brilliant goal. 

As I looked across the field to the intense blue waters a the Mediter- 
ranean that broke in a white fringe of foam on the rocks below, the 
whole human scene, that we have been looking upon in this book, flashed 
into my mind. The world (I saw) is just such a football field. The 
problem of the world racial conflict is precisely the same as the problem 
of the sports-captain at Beirut. There are the nations on that vast world- 
field—each trying to dribble the ball of achievement down the field of 
history, to score the goal of racial or national glory for itself. There 
is no team-play on a World scale. The need of the human race is 
for a World International Team. 


Basil Mathews, “The Clash of Color.” 


SCHOOL-ROOM METHODS 


An “Other Nation” Day: One day a month can be set aside on which 
a child can pretend to be the child of another nation, wearing a simple 
costume, learning a phrase or two of the other child’s language, eating 
as nearly as possible its food, hearing the stories it hears and playing 
the games it plays. 

A Scrap-Book of Other Nations: An around the world scrap-book in 
which a child can collect pictures of other nations is a fascinating rainy- 
day pastime. 

An Around-the-World Frieze: A frieze can be made for a child’s 
room by cutting out pictures of children of other nations, as, for instance, 
from the posters, Children from Many Lands. 


Refuse to give toys bringing memories of the world-destroying war. 
Refuse to give your children warlike clothes and uniforms. Refuse to 
give toy soldiers. Refuse to give toy weapons. 

Give boxes of bricks and platsticine, Dresden wooden toys and work- 
men’s attire (miners, artisans, sailors). 

Refuse to give books which glorify war, which awaken a warlike spirit. 

Give books about animals and plants, about foreign countries and 
stars, books of work and fairy tales. 

Refuse to give pictures representing battlefields, the tortures of the 
wounded and dying soldiers, the intoxication of victory. 

Give pictures of landscapes, towns, and fantasies. 

Do not continue to poison the souls and imaginations of your children 
with the spirit of hatred. You awaken and feed that spirit by giving 
warlike games and books. 

Think of the true heritage of the child! Give back to him the true 
kingdom of childhood. 

A Kingdom of Cheerfulness—without cruelty. 

A Kingdom of Kindness—without arms. 

A Kingdom of Peace—without hatred. 

A Kingdom of Reconciliation—without enmity. 

A Kingdom of Life, of Peace, of Work, of Mutual Aid. 

From appeal circulated in England, Germany, France and the United 

States, 1922, 1923, (quoted in “Educational Survey,’ Compiled by 
National Council for Prevention of War, Washington, D. C.) 


77 


USE OF STORIES 


Except for pictures and objects . . . (stories) form the chief means 
O . instruction which may be used with beginners. The stories must 
be carefully chosen and well told. Stories about other children are 
particularly valuable, not so much to instruct concerning details of their 
lives, but rather, to arouse love and sympathy for them. 

Stories for beginners must be short and simple, barely more than inci- 
dents: Tell your beginners stories that show the love and care given 
by the heavenly Father to all his little ones. Tell them stories that have 
to do with little children who live in other countries. . . . And be sure 
to make use of stories telling of simple ways in which children have 
helped God in his care for his creatures by working with him for other 
children. . . . 

Every lesson may be made a . . . (brotherhood) lesson for the pri- 
mary child by emphasizing love for and trust in God and love for all 
of his people. We must teach him that God is the Father of all the 
children in the world, and that all boys and girls are members of one 
great family. Then we must train him in the right behavior toward the 
members of the family. The spirit of helpfulness is easily aroused in 
little folks of this age when their interest has once been fastened upon 
the other children of the world. 

Gilbert Loveland, “Training World Christians.” 


FIRST HABITS FOR INTERNATIONALISM 


Trying to understand the other party, unquestionably is one of the most 
broadening of human experiences. Trying sincerely to make an adjust- 
ment between one’s own views and views that are divergent, is perhaps 
the most civilizing of human experiences. Internationalism stands or 
falls with our wish and our ability to do those two things. Hitherto our 
educational schemes—as likewise our political techniques—have made 
little provision for training along these lines. Even history has been 
studied not so much for the purpose of understanding other peoples as for 
the purpose of learning information about more or less external events 
in their lives. And practically nowhere in our schools has there been a 
deliberate effort to adjust our own . . . interests and ideals to the ideals 
and interests of other lands. . 

. . . When we succeed in doing this, we shall achieve in our students 
the first essential of the international mind. 

Harry A. Overstreet, “Forming First Habits for Internationalism,” 

Progressive Education, 1925. 


PEACE LESSONS FOR SCHOOLS 


Teachers who desire suggestions and material for the inculcation of 
peace ideals in the class-room, should order three little books, by Anna 
Van Loan, entitled “Peace Lessons for Schools,” published by Revell, 
New York, at $1 per volume. Volume III contains lessons for the 
intermediate grades. As a first attempt in the direction of curriculum 
material for younger children, these books are commended. 


78 


XV—PRAYERS FOR PEACE 


PRAYER FOR THE PREVENTION OF WAR 


O, Lord, since first the blood of Abel cried to thee from the ground 
that drank it, this earth of thine has been defiled with the blood of man 
shed by his brother’s hand, and the centuries sob with the ceaseless hor- 
ror of war. Ever the pride of kings and the covetousness of the strong 
‘have driven peaceful nations to slaughter. Ever the songs of the past 
and the pomp of armies have been used to inflame the passions of the 
people. Our spirit cries out to thee in revolt against it, and we know that 
our righteous anger is answered by thy holy wrath. 

Break thou the spell of the enchantments that make the nations drunk 
with the lust of battle and draw them on as willing tools of death. 
Grant us a quiet and steadfast mind when our own nation clamors for 
vengeance or aggression. Strengthen our sense of justice and our regard 
for the equal worth of other peoples and races. Grant to the rulers of 
nations faith in the possibility of peace through justice and grant to 
the common people a new and stern enthusiasm for the cause of peace. 
Bless our soldiers and sailors for their swift obedience and their willing- 
ness to answer to the call of duty, but inspire them none the less with a 
hatred of war, and may they never for the love of private glory or 
advancement provoke its coming. May our young men still rejoice to 
die for their country with the valor of their fathers, but teach our age 
nobler methods of matching our strength and more effective ways of 
giving our life for the flag. 

O thou strong Father of all nations, draw all thy great family to- 
gether with an increasing sense of our common blood and destiny, that 
peace may come on earth at last, and thy sun may shed its light rejoicing 
on a holy brotherhood of peoples. 


Walter Rauschenbusch, “Prayers of the Social Awakening.” 


PRAYER FOR FREEDOM FROM RACE PREJUDICE 


O God who hast made man in Thine own likeness and who dost love 
all whom Thou hast made, suffer us not, because of difference in race, 
color or condition, to separate ourselves from others and thereby from 
yee but teach us the unity of Thy family and the universality of Thy 
ove. 

As Thy Son, our Saviour, was born of an Hebrew mother and minis- 
tered first to His brethren of the House of Israel, but rejoiced in the 
faith of a Syro-Phoenician woman and of a Roman soldier, and suffered 
His cross to be carried by a man of Africa; teach us, also, while loving 
and serving our own, to enter into the communion of the whole human 
family; and forbid that, from pride of birth and hardness of heart, we 
poe despise any for whom Christ died, or injure any in whom He lives. 

men. 

Mornay Williams, “Federal Council Bulletin,” 
January-February, 1925. 


79 


PRAYING FOR PEACE 


A Prayer for Peace: Our Father Who art in Heaven: Help us, Thy 
children, to do all we can to bring “Peace on Earth, Good-will to Men.” 
Help us to remember that Christ said: “Little children . . . love one 
another.” Help us to love all the little children who live in all the 
other interesting countries of Thy world, and who are Thy children, just 
as we are Thy children. Help us to feel in our hearts this love for 
everyone all our lives. And to remember always, that Thou art the lov- 
ing Father of us all. Amen. 

International Prayer: Father, bless all the little children who are 
now going to bed, and help all the little children who are playing in the 
sunshine while we sleep to have a happy day. 


Educational Survey, National Council for Prevention of War. 


GOD OF ALL NATIONS 


God of all nations, 

We pray for all the peoples of the earth, 

For those who are consumed in mutual hatred and bitterness, 
For those who make bloody war upon their neighbors, 

For those who tyrannously oppress, 

For those who groan under cruelty and subjection. 

We pray thee for all those who bear rule and responsibility, 
For child races and dying races, 

For outcast tribes, the backward and downtrodden, 

For the ignorant, wretched, and the enslaved. 

We beseech thee, teach mankind to live together in peace, 

No man exploiting the weak, no man hating the strong, 

Each race working out its own destiny, 

Unfettered, self-respecting, fearless. 

Teach us to be worthy of freedom, 

Free from social wrong, free from individual oppression and contempt, 
Pure of heart and hand, despising none, defrauding none, 
Giving to all men in all the dealings of life 

The honor we owe to those who are thy children, 

Whatever their color, their race, or their caste. 


—From A Book of Prayers for Use in an Indian College. 


The Lord’s Prayer 


OUR FATHER, WHO ART IN HEAVEN, 
HALLOWED BE THY NAME, 
THY KINGDOM COME, 
THY WILL BE DONE ON EARTH AS IT IS IN HEAVEN; 
GIVE US DAY BY DAY OUR DAILY BREAD, 
AND FORGIVE US OUR TRESPASSES AS WE FORGIVE THOSE 
WHO TRESPASS AGAINST US; 
LEAD US NOT INTO TEMPTATION BUT DELIVER US 
FROM EVIL. 
FOR THINE IS THE KINGDOM AND THE POWER AND 
THE GLORY, 
FOREVER AND EVER. 


AMEN. 
80 


SOURCES OF QUOTATIONS 


The Abolition of War, by Sherwood Eddy, pp 224, George H. Doran 
Co., 1924. 

A Better World, by Tyler Dennett, pp 173, George H. Doran Co., 1920. 

Book of Missionary Heroes, by Basil Mathews, pp 280, George H. Doran 
(0501922: 

The Business of Missions, by Cornelius H. Patton, pp 290, Macmillan 
Co., 1924. 

The Christ of the Andes, by Frederick Lynch, pp 7, American Peace 
Society, 1905. 

The Christian Crusade for a Warless World, by Sydney S. Gulick, pp. 
197, Macmillan Co., 1922. 

The Christian Equivalent of War, by D. Willard Lyon, pp 154, Associa- 
tion Press, 1915. 

Christian Fellowship Among the Nations, by Jerome Davis and Roy B. 
Chamberlain, pp 116, The Pilgrim Press, 1925. 

Christian Internationalism, by William Pierson Merrill, pp 193, Mac- 
millan Co., 1919. 

Christianity and the Race Problem, by J. H. Oldham, pp 280, Student 

' Christian Movement, 1924. 

Christ or Mars? by Will Irwin, pp 118, D. Appleton & Co., 1923. 

The Clash of Color, by Basil Mathews, pp 176, London, United Council 
for Missionary Education, 1924. 

The Control of the Tropics, by Benjamin Kidd, pp 101, Macmillan Co., 
1898. 

The Economic Causes of Modern War, by John Bakeless, pp 265, Moffat, 
Yard & Co., 1878-1918. 

The Great Determination, by Margaret Deland, Woman’s Home Com- 
panion, 1923. 

International Relations, by James Bryce, pp 275, Macmillan Co., 1922. 

International Thought, by John Galsworthy, Woman’s Home Companion, 
1923. 

Kenya, by Norman Leys, pp 409, Hogarth, 1924. 

The Life and Times of Cavour, by Prof. William Roscoe Thayer, 
Houghton, Mifflin Co., 1923. 

Marks of a World Christian, by Daniel Johnson Fleming, pp 198, Asso- 
ciation Press, 1922. 

The Mastery of the Far East, by Arthur Judson Brown, pp 671, Charles 
Scribner’s Sons, 1919. 

Missionary Ammunition, No. Ten, Committee of Reference and Counsel. 

Missions and International Peace, by Rev. Charles E. Jefferson, D.D., 
Centennial Meeting of the American Board in Tremont Temple, Oct. 
125.1910. N.Y, 1911. 

The Next War, by Will Irwin, pp 161, E. P. Dutton & Co., 1921. 


81 


Of One Blood, by Robert E. Speer, pp 258, Council of Women for Home 
Missions and Missionary Education Movement of the U. S. and 
Canada, 1924. 

Prayers of the Social Awakening, by Walter Rauschenbusch, pp 154, 
Pilgrim Press, 1925. 

The Prevention of War, by Philip Kerr and Lionel Curtis, pp 170, Uni- 
versity Press, 1923. 

Race and Race Relations, by Robert E. Speer, pp 434, Fleming H. Revell 
Co., 1924. 

The Science of Power, by Benjamin Kidd, pp. 318, G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 
1918. 

Shall We Commit Suicide? by Winston S. Churchill, Reprinted from 
Nash’s Pall Mall Magazine, September 24, 1924. 

A Short History of International Intercourse, by C. Delisle Burns, pp 
159, University Press, 1923. 

Social Aspects of Foreign Missions, by W. H. P. Faunce, pp 309, Mis- 
sionary Education Movement of the U. S. and Canada, 1914. 

The Social Work of Christian Missions, by Alva W. Taylor, pp 265, The 
Foreign Christian Missionary Society, 1911. 

The Things Men Fight For, by Dr. H. H. Powers, pp 382, Macmillan 
Co., 1916. 

Training World Christians, by Gilbert Loveland, pp 240, Methodist Book 
Concern, 1921. 

Twenty-Five Years (1892-1916), Chap. XXXI, 2 v., Viscount Grey, 
Frederick A. Stokes Co. 

War, by Kirby Page, George H. Doran Co., 1923. 

The Way to a Warless World, by Evelyn Riley Nicholson, Abingdon 
Press, 1924. 

What Price Peace? by Frederick J. Libby, pp 12, National Council for 
the Prevention of War. 

Whither Bound in Missions, by Daniel Johnson Fleming, pp 222, Asso- 
ciation Press, 1925. 


) woo” ‘ 
Be Pi A 
Wesigteo. ae} i 


} i? 
at A 
Ya i 
bi ‘ 
Wa ‘t 


4 Ps 
aire 













JX1937 .F71 
Education for peace; a book of facts and 


Princeton Theological Seminary—Speer Library 


LQ 000 


1 1012 00003 5495 





